hey guys, i am looking to purchase a new table saw.......have a 10 year
old craftsman contractor saw and need to upgrade. i will have to put it
into my basement with limited space, so looking for decent contractor saw.
This Grizzly http://www.grizzly.com/products/Contractor-Style-Saw/G0732
is the saw i am leaning towards purchasing. are there any better options in
this price range? tia
On 3/5/2014 11:18 PM, Lew Hodgett wrote:
> Leon wrote:
>
>> On my Win 7 PC using Chrome, my iPad, iPhone using Safari simply
>> typing
>> SawStop.com and pressing enter I get what I expect, the SawStop web
>> site.
>> You don't?
> --------------------------------
> Yes but that is 11 keystrokes, not 8.
>
> Lew
>
>
>
>
Leave out the .com. Just type in the name sawstop (or anything you
want) and hit Ctrl/Enter and it will put the .com in for you.
I've saved enough keystrokes last year to buy a Harbor Freight 20% off
coupon.
"Lew Hodgett" <[email protected]> wrote:
> Lew Hodgett wrote:
>
>> Update:
>>
>> This is a better link:
>>
>> http://tinyurl.com/cz2lu
>>
> ---------------------------------------------------------
> "Leon" wrote:
>
>> Excellent suggestion Lew! But sawstop.com is a shorter URL.
> --------------------------------------------------------
> Not really.
>
> 1) Do a Google on "saw stop". 9 keystrokes including space
> 2) Highlight and select sawstop.com using mouse. No keystrokes
> 3) Highlight "tinyurl" in toolbar using mouse. No keystrokes
> 4) Place copy of tinyurl in clipboard using mouse. No keystrokes
> 5) Paste tinyurl in e-mail. No keystrokes
>
> Grand total: 9 keystrokes + 5 mouse commands.
>
> Devil made me do it <G>
>
> Lew
On my Win 7 PC using Chrome, my iPad, iPhone using Safari simply typing
SawStop.com and pressing enter I get what I expect, the SawStop web site.
You don't?
On 3/6/2014 10:05 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> On 3/5/2014 11:18 PM, Lew Hodgett wrote:
>> Leon wrote:
>>
>>> On my Win 7 PC using Chrome, my iPad, iPhone using Safari simply
>>> typing
>>> SawStop.com and pressing enter I get what I expect, the SawStop web
>>> site.
>>> You don't?
>> --------------------------------
>> Yes but that is 11 keystrokes, not 8.
>>
>> Lew
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> Leave out the .com. Just type in the name sawstop (or anything you
> want) and hit Ctrl/Enter and it will put the .com in for you.
>
> I've saved enough keystrokes last year to buy a Harbor Freight 20% off
> coupon.
LOL +1
On Sun, 09 Mar 2014 11:19:11 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>On Sun, 09 Mar 2014 11:06:49 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>>Not like everything else. The difference is the cost (and the
>>patents). Let's do this again after the patents run out.
>
>I'm wondering how many less than ten fingered woodworking people would
>agree with you?
Completely irrelevant. A similar silly-statement would be "How many
people who had limbs lost in car accidents, prefer they stayed home
that day?". Life *is* about risk/reward, no matter how much the
nanny-state tries to tell you otherwise.
There is no such thing as "safe". The only question is how much are
you willing to pay for each bit of "safety". When I bought my saw, I
looked at a SawStop but decided that the Unisaw would look nice in the
garage (nicer than the Griz). A picture of a SawStop just wouldn't
cut it.
Do you have a SawStop?
On Tue, 11 Mar 2014 12:22:02 -0400, "Mike Marlow"
<[email protected]> wrote:
>FrozenNorth wrote:
>> On 3/11/2014 11:05 AM, [email protected] wrote:
>>> On Tue, 11 Mar 2014 10:56:34 -0400, "Mike Marlow"
>>>> Interesting statement Dave - what makes you say that?
>>>
>>> Because Rob Lee told me that they 'recommended' them.
>>>
>> It is no different than my insurance company, they stopped covering a
>> fuel oil tank in my basement, of course the rate didn't drop. But
>> they will cover it still, if I pay for a separate rider on my policy,
>> price was crazy stupid.
>
>That is just stupid. But...
It sure is. Would they rather you buried it?
On 3/9/2014 6:23 PM, [email protected] wrote:
> On Sun, 09 Mar 2014 18:15:05 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet>
> wrote:
>
>> On 3/9/2014 5:05 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>>> On Sun, 09 Mar 2014 13:31:05 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 3/9/2014 12:18 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>>>>> On Sun, 09 Mar 2014 13:03:10 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Sun, 09 Mar 2014 12:42:21 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>>>>>>> Fact, Jack. That's *exactly* the decision I was confronted with.
>>>>>>> $1600 for the Unisaw - $3500 for the "equivalent" SawStop. The $1600
>>>>>>> was do-able (up from the $1400 for the budgeted Griz). $3500 would
>>>>>>> have had me laughed out of the "capital acquisition" meeting.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> As usual, your fact are full of holes.
>>>>>
>>>>> Now you're calling me a liar. Figures.
>>>>>
>>>>>> Powermatic PM2000 ~ $3000
>>>>>> Delta 36-L352 ~ $3000
>>>>>> SawStop Professional cabinet saw ~ $3000
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://www.consumersearch.com/table-saw-reviews/cabinet-saws
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm telling you WHAT MY DECISION WAS. GOT IT?
>>>>>
>>>>>> The REAL TRUTH is that MOST SawStop naysayers like you are too busy
>>>>>> letting your emotions overrule your common sense. You hate GASS'
>>>>>> business tactics so much that you'll consider any excuse to exclude a
>>>>>> SawStop from your purchasing condition.
>>>>>
>>>>> Bullshit. Like most suck-ups, you're talking out both sides of your
>>>>> mouth. You admit that price is an issue and that there is a decision
>>>>> to be made, yet you denigrate those who don't agree with a choice
>>>>> you've NEVER MADE and probably never will.
>>>>>
>>>>> I don't care that some love SawStop. Sobeit. Their decision.
>>>>> However, when some know-nothing jumps into the fray, talking out both
>>>>> sided of his mouth, it's really funny.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> It does speak volumes to actually have stepped up and bought the saw. I
>>>> did.
>>>
>>> Yes, it means you weighed the choices and decided that it was worth
>>> it. I'm perfectly fine with that, as long as that choice exists.
>>>
>>>> Every one is entitled to their opinion with out being attacked and or
>>>> being compared to an idiot or the possibility of being more of an idiot.
>>>
>>> Well, that's really at the bottom of my point. Choice is a good
>>> thing.
>>>
>>>> Experience trumps, "what he said" or going with the popular consensus,
>>>> every time.
>>>
>>> AGW is pretty popular but it doesn't make it right. Socialism is
>>> pretty popular, right now, too.
>>>
>>
>>
>> I think where you and I may be at odds on this discussion is that you
>> might think that "I" think the SawStop should be in every ones shop. I
>> don't believe that to the extent that everyone must have one in their
>> shop.
>
> You've certainly made that implication, in the past and really are
> quite close to it in this.
Well way way back when I thought it was a good enough idea to make
mandatory. I have changed my mind on that given the implications that if
you give them an inch they will take a mile. I never liked the method
of the product being marketed after being turned down by the other
builders. But I am quite flexible in my thinking. If you can show me
valid reasoning I will consider it but I prefer to leave the emotional
side of reasoning to my wife, and she would whole heartily agree.
>
>> I think it would be good if the competition would have partnered
>> with SawStop to begin with and then every one could have had the choice
>> of having the technology "or not" in the brands of their choice.
>
> Gass had no intention of making it available with "reasonable and
> non-discriminatory" conditions.
Well that is here say. Since no actual contracts were negotiated no one
really knows what the contracts would have said. Naturally a
manufacturer will ask the highest price that they think they can get.
And one of the manufacturers did agree to the some kind of terms but
something, and no one knows what that some thing was, did cause the deal
to fall through the cracks. I highly suspect there was some agreement,
by those that were approached, to not accept the offers and force this
new guy out. Little did any of them know just how successful Gass would
be in producing his own product and is also suspect they are all
probably rethinking the opportunity missed.
In a nut shell no one knows what any of the negotiated deals would have
been.
>
>> I prefer to leave the political aspect out of the discussion.
>
> Impossible. It is at its heart a political discussion.
Perhaps impossible for you but I have no problem with simply looking at
the product. Now if you really want to get pissed off lets consider the
fact that we no longer have a choice of buying health care or not. At
least with the SawStop the intentions were not to mandate that every
citizen of the US be required to buy a SawStop even if they did not ever
have any intention of buying any woodworking equipment what so ever.
On 3/13/2014 7:43 PM, [email protected] wrote:
> On Thu, 13 Mar 2014 08:41:23 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 13 Mar 2014 06:07:04 -0500, Swingman <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> EOT?
>>
>> Not likely!
>
> Keep it up. There may still be someone out there who doesn't know
> what an ass you are.
Except that wasn't me ...
--
eWoodShop: www.eWoodShop.com
Wood Shop: www.e-WoodShop.net
https://www.google.com/+eWoodShop
https://plus.google.com/+KarlCaillouet/posts
http://www.custommade.com/by/ewoodshop/
KarlCaillouet@ (the obvious)
On Thu, 13 Mar 2014 08:41:23 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>On Thu, 13 Mar 2014 06:07:04 -0500, Swingman <[email protected]> wrote:
>>EOT?
>
>Not likely!
Keep it up. There may still be someone out there who doesn't know
what an ass you are.
Swingman wrote:
> On 3/13/2014 7:43 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>> On Thu, 13 Mar 2014 08:41:23 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, 13 Mar 2014 06:07:04 -0500, Swingman <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> EOT?
>>>
>>> Not likely!
>>
>> Keep it up. There may still be someone out there who doesn't know
>> what an ass you are.
>
> Except that wasn't me ...
I should have jumped in when you first posted "EOT". My mind immediately
jumped (in a reflex sort of way...) to End Of Tape. How many computer geeks
here remember that term?
BTW - I think you hit on something with that Karl!
--
-Mike-
[email protected]
On 3/13/2014 11:26 PM, Larry Blanchard wrote:
> On Thu, 13 Mar 2014 21:57:48 -0400, Mike Marlow wrote:
>
>> I should have jumped in when you first posted "EOT". My mind
>> immediately jumped (in a reflex sort of way...) to End Of Tape. How
>> many computer geeks here remember that term?
>
> $$JOB
> $$EOJ
>
>
EOF end of file
EOD end of day job
EOM end of month job
EOY end of year job
EOQ end of quarter job...
plenty of them..
nothing is like that anymore.
--
Jeff
On Sun, 09 Mar 2014 18:15:05 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet>
wrote:
>On 3/9/2014 5:05 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>> On Sun, 09 Mar 2014 13:31:05 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 3/9/2014 12:18 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>>>> On Sun, 09 Mar 2014 13:03:10 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Sun, 09 Mar 2014 12:42:21 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>>>>>> Fact, Jack. That's *exactly* the decision I was confronted with.
>>>>>> $1600 for the Unisaw - $3500 for the "equivalent" SawStop. The $1600
>>>>>> was do-able (up from the $1400 for the budgeted Griz). $3500 would
>>>>>> have had me laughed out of the "capital acquisition" meeting.
>>>>>
>>>>> As usual, your fact are full of holes.
>>>>
>>>> Now you're calling me a liar. Figures.
>>>>
>>>>> Powermatic PM2000 ~ $3000
>>>>> Delta 36-L352 ~ $3000
>>>>> SawStop Professional cabinet saw ~ $3000
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.consumersearch.com/table-saw-reviews/cabinet-saws
>>>>
>>>> I'm telling you WHAT MY DECISION WAS. GOT IT?
>>>>
>>>>> The REAL TRUTH is that MOST SawStop naysayers like you are too busy
>>>>> letting your emotions overrule your common sense. You hate GASS'
>>>>> business tactics so much that you'll consider any excuse to exclude a
>>>>> SawStop from your purchasing condition.
>>>>
>>>> Bullshit. Like most suck-ups, you're talking out both sides of your
>>>> mouth. You admit that price is an issue and that there is a decision
>>>> to be made, yet you denigrate those who don't agree with a choice
>>>> you've NEVER MADE and probably never will.
>>>>
>>>> I don't care that some love SawStop. Sobeit. Their decision.
>>>> However, when some know-nothing jumps into the fray, talking out both
>>>> sided of his mouth, it's really funny.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> It does speak volumes to actually have stepped up and bought the saw. I
>>> did.
>>
>> Yes, it means you weighed the choices and decided that it was worth
>> it. I'm perfectly fine with that, as long as that choice exists.
>>
>>> Every one is entitled to their opinion with out being attacked and or
>>> being compared to an idiot or the possibility of being more of an idiot.
>>
>> Well, that's really at the bottom of my point. Choice is a good
>> thing.
>>
>>> Experience trumps, "what he said" or going with the popular consensus,
>>> every time.
>>
>> AGW is pretty popular but it doesn't make it right. Socialism is
>> pretty popular, right now, too.
>>
>
>
>I think where you and I may be at odds on this discussion is that you
>might think that "I" think the SawStop should be in every ones shop. I
>don't believe that to the extent that everyone must have one in their
>shop.
You've certainly made that implication, in the past and really are
quite close to it in this.
>I think it would be good if the competition would have partnered
>with SawStop to begin with and then every one could have had the choice
>of having the technology "or not" in the brands of their choice.
Gass had no intention of making it available with "reasonable and
non-discriminatory" conditions.
>I prefer to leave the political aspect out of the discussion.
Impossible. It is at its heart a political discussion.
On Thu, 13 Mar 2014 06:07:04 -0500, Swingman <[email protected]> wrote:
>EOT?
Not likely!
On 3/11/2014 11:05 AM, [email protected] wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Mar 2014 10:56:34 -0400, "Mike Marlow"
>> Interesting statement Dave - what makes you say that?
>
> Because Rob Lee told me that they 'recommended' them.
>
It is no different than my insurance company, they stopped covering a
fuel oil tank in my basement, of course the rate didn't drop. But they
will cover it still, if I pay for a separate rider on my policy, price
was crazy stupid.
--
Froz...
The system will be down for 10 days for preventive maintenance.
FrozenNorth wrote:
> On 3/11/2014 11:05 AM, [email protected] wrote:
>> On Tue, 11 Mar 2014 10:56:34 -0400, "Mike Marlow"
>>> Interesting statement Dave - what makes you say that?
>>
>> Because Rob Lee told me that they 'recommended' them.
>>
> It is no different than my insurance company, they stopped covering a
> fuel oil tank in my basement, of course the rate didn't drop. But
> they will cover it still, if I pay for a separate rider on my policy,
> price was crazy stupid.
That is just stupid. But...
--
-Mike-
[email protected]
On 3/11/2014 12:22 PM, Mike Marlow wrote:
> FrozenNorth wrote:
>> On 3/11/2014 11:05 AM, [email protected] wrote:
>>> On Tue, 11 Mar 2014 10:56:34 -0400, "Mike Marlow"
>>>> Interesting statement Dave - what makes you say that?
>>>
>>> Because Rob Lee told me that they 'recommended' them.
>>>
>> It is no different than my insurance company, they stopped covering a
>> fuel oil tank in my basement, of course the rate didn't drop. But
>> they will cover it still, if I pay for a separate rider on my policy,
>> price was crazy stupid.
>
> That is just stupid. But...
>
Old tank was nearly 60 years old, I put in a new tank, double walled
with a float in between, first tank leaks, float rises and I know I have
to get another tank. Just pass on the insurance.
--
Froz...
The system will be down for 10 days for preventive maintenance.
FrozenNorth wrote:
> On 3/11/2014 12:22 PM, Mike Marlow wrote:
>> FrozenNorth wrote:
>>> On 3/11/2014 11:05 AM, [email protected] wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 11 Mar 2014 10:56:34 -0400, "Mike Marlow"
>>>>> Interesting statement Dave - what makes you say that?
>>>>
>>>> Because Rob Lee told me that they 'recommended' them.
>>>>
>>> It is no different than my insurance company, they stopped covering
>>> a fuel oil tank in my basement, of course the rate didn't drop. But
>>> they will cover it still, if I pay for a separate rider on my
>>> policy, price was crazy stupid.
>>
>> That is just stupid. But...
>>
> Old tank was nearly 60 years old, I put in a new tank, double walled
> with a float in between, first tank leaks, float rises and I know I
> have to get another tank. Just pass on the insurance.
So - I can understand (maybe...) not insuring the old tank (biut that's just
a maybe...), but with new tank technology, that just does not make any
sense. Maybe someone in the insurance industry can explain how many claims
have been paid out for basement fuel oil tanks over the years. With all of
the years I spent in the fire service, and with what I observe in the daily
news, it just does not seem there is a real threat here. Seems to me to
more of a profit motive.
--
-Mike-
[email protected]
On 3/11/2014 1:57 PM, Mike Marlow wrote:
> FrozenNorth wrote:
>> On 3/11/2014 12:22 PM, Mike Marlow wrote:
>>> FrozenNorth wrote:
>>>> On 3/11/2014 11:05 AM, [email protected] wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, 11 Mar 2014 10:56:34 -0400, "Mike Marlow"
>>>>>> Interesting statement Dave - what makes you say that?
>>>>>
>>>>> Because Rob Lee told me that they 'recommended' them.
>>>>>
>>>> It is no different than my insurance company, they stopped covering
>>>> a fuel oil tank in my basement, of course the rate didn't drop. But
>>>> they will cover it still, if I pay for a separate rider on my
>>>> policy, price was crazy stupid.
>>>
>>> That is just stupid. But...
>>>
>> Old tank was nearly 60 years old, I put in a new tank, double walled
>> with a float in between, first tank leaks, float rises and I know I
>> have to get another tank. Just pass on the insurance.
>
> So - I can understand (maybe...) not insuring the old tank (biut that's just
> a maybe...), but with new tank technology, that just does not make any
> sense. Maybe someone in the insurance industry can explain how many claims
> have been paid out for basement fuel oil tanks over the years. With all of
> the years I spent in the fire service, and with what I observe in the daily
> news, it just does not seem there is a real threat here. Seems to me to
> more of a profit motive.
>
My thoughts exactly, the new tank warns me when the inner tank fails,
then I have time to get the tank replaced before the outer tank fails.
I called the insurance company told them what was now installed, and
they had no clue what I was talking about. For that tank to fail, I
would have to take up basement spear tossing as a hobby, or the rest of
the house crashed down on it.
--
Froz...
The system will be down for 10 days for preventive maintenance.
FrozenNorth wrote:
> On 3/11/2014 1:57 PM, Mike Marlow wrote:
>> FrozenNorth wrote:
>>> On 3/11/2014 12:22 PM, Mike Marlow wrote:
>>>> FrozenNorth wrote:
>>>>> On 3/11/2014 11:05 AM, [email protected] wrote:
>>>>>> On Tue, 11 Mar 2014 10:56:34 -0400, "Mike Marlow"
>>>>>>> Interesting statement Dave - what makes you say that?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Because Rob Lee told me that they 'recommended' them.
>>>>>>
>>>>> It is no different than my insurance company, they stopped
>>>>> covering a fuel oil tank in my basement, of course the rate
>>>>> didn't drop. But they will cover it still, if I pay for a
>>>>> separate rider on my policy, price was crazy stupid.
>>>>
>>>> That is just stupid. But...
>>>>
>>> Old tank was nearly 60 years old, I put in a new tank, double walled
>>> with a float in between, first tank leaks, float rises and I know I
>>> have to get another tank. Just pass on the insurance.
>>
>> So - I can understand (maybe...) not insuring the old tank (biut
>> that's just a maybe...), but with new tank technology, that just
>> does not make any sense. Maybe someone in the insurance industry
>> can explain how many claims have been paid out for basement fuel oil
>> tanks over the years. With all of the years I spent in the fire
>> service, and with what I observe in the daily news, it just does not
>> seem there is a real threat here. Seems to me to more of a profit
>> motive.
> My thoughts exactly, the new tank warns me when the inner tank fails,
> then I have time to get the tank replaced before the outer tank fails.
> I called the insurance company told them what was now installed, and
> they had no clue what I was talking about. For that tank to fail, I
> would have to take up basement spear tossing as a hobby, or the rest
> of the house crashed down on it.
It might be worth the effort to call them to your premise. I don't know how
things work up there, but when I first insured my house, they wanted to
force me into flood insurance. I explained and showed them topo maps of the
surrounding area indicating that I was 50 feet above the flood plane. No
luck. Out of desperation, I finally asked both the bank and the insurance
company out to see the surroundings and to explain to me why I should pay
these added fees. They came out. It was brain-dead obvious once they got
here, but you couldn't convince them of that prior to the trip out.
Sheese...
--
-Mike-
[email protected]
On 3/11/2014 2:11 PM, Mike Marlow wrote:
> FrozenNorth wrote:
>> On 3/11/2014 1:57 PM, Mike Marlow wrote:
>>> FrozenNorth wrote:
>>>> On 3/11/2014 12:22 PM, Mike Marlow wrote:
>>>>> FrozenNorth wrote:
>>>>>> On 3/11/2014 11:05 AM, [email protected] wrote:
>>>>>>> On Tue, 11 Mar 2014 10:56:34 -0400, "Mike Marlow"
>>>>>>>> Interesting statement Dave - what makes you say that?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Because Rob Lee told me that they 'recommended' them.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> It is no different than my insurance company, they stopped
>>>>>> covering a fuel oil tank in my basement, of course the rate
>>>>>> didn't drop. But they will cover it still, if I pay for a
>>>>>> separate rider on my policy, price was crazy stupid.
>>>>>
>>>>> That is just stupid. But...
>>>>>
>>>> Old tank was nearly 60 years old, I put in a new tank, double walled
>>>> with a float in between, first tank leaks, float rises and I know I
>>>> have to get another tank. Just pass on the insurance.
>>>
>>> So - I can understand (maybe...) not insuring the old tank (biut
>>> that's just a maybe...), but with new tank technology, that just
>>> does not make any sense. Maybe someone in the insurance industry
>>> can explain how many claims have been paid out for basement fuel oil
>>> tanks over the years. With all of the years I spent in the fire
>>> service, and with what I observe in the daily news, it just does not
>>> seem there is a real threat here. Seems to me to more of a profit
>>> motive.
>> My thoughts exactly, the new tank warns me when the inner tank fails,
>> then I have time to get the tank replaced before the outer tank fails.
>> I called the insurance company told them what was now installed, and
>> they had no clue what I was talking about. For that tank to fail, I
>> would have to take up basement spear tossing as a hobby, or the rest
>> of the house crashed down on it.
>
> It might be worth the effort to call them to your premise. I don't know how
> things work up there, but when I first insured my house, they wanted to
> force me into flood insurance. I explained and showed them topo maps of the
> surrounding area indicating that I was 50 feet above the flood plane. No
> luck. Out of desperation, I finally asked both the bank and the insurance
> company out to see the surroundings and to explain to me why I should pay
> these added fees. They came out. It was brain-dead obvious once they got
> here, but you couldn't convince them of that prior to the trip out.
> Sheese...
>
I went through that and was about 1' above the expensive zone. I paid
to have an elevation survey, about $250 in 2006. Shortly after Katrina
satellites were used to determine flood zones. While $250 sounds like a
lot of money it was the only way I kept my flood premium from going from
$234 a year to $3600 after the satellite rezoning. Unfortunately my
rated did go up but to only $59o after submitting that the satellite
elevations were wrong.
On 3/9/2014 10:35 AM, [email protected] wrote:
> On Sun, 09 Mar 2014 11:19:11 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 09 Mar 2014 11:06:49 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>>> Not like everything else. The difference is the cost (and the
>>> patents). Let's do this again after the patents run out.
>>
>> I'm wondering how many less than ten fingered woodworking people would
>> agree with you?
>
> Completely irrelevant. A similar silly-statement would be "How many
> people who had limbs lost in car accidents, prefer they stayed home
> that day?". Life *is* about risk/reward, no matter how much the
> nanny-state tries to tell you otherwise.
>
> There is no such thing as "safe". The only question is how much are
> you willing to pay for each bit of "safety". When I bought my saw, I
> looked at a SawStop but decided that the Unisaw would look nice in the
> garage (nicer than the Griz). A picture of a SawStop just wouldn't
> cut it.
>
> Do you have a SawStop?
>
>
FWIW I had the same attitude and comments here as those that have not
yet benefited from the SawStop or see the benefit of spending and extra
thousand on a saw, 25 years ago.
You cut your self it is your own damn fault and you did something wrong.
I'll be careful and practice every rule that I have read or have been
taught.
Then one day I cut half my thumb off, about 15 years later SawStop is on
the horizon. Today I own a SawStop. Wow what did I do wrong???
Hummmmmm obviously I did something wrong... and it took me about one
year to almost cut my thumb off again before I realized what had
actually happened. No set of safety rules "directly" addressed what
went wrong. I can assure you that safety rules only cover the basics
and it is not unusual to be in a situation that is not specifically
addressed in the "rules".
Unfortunately one never really understands every conceivable way that
you can be injured by the TS, that is until you have an unfortunate
accident, IF you have an accident. No one ever tries to have an
accident but no one lives a charmed life, one with out accidents.
It is all a matter of choice of how safe you want your equipment to be
and how much you value your safety.
All things considered, and knowing what I do about why accidents are
called accidents, I choose my safety over principal.
So for anyone that has not yet been convinced that a SawStop is a smart
investment or an investment worth saving up for, I totally understand, I
have been in your shoes.
And FWIW if any one believes that you will get a false sense of security
by using a SawStop TS I can assure you that I have not. There is
something about a blade spinning at 100 MPH that is very real and still
very intimidating.
Why do I preach the SawStop? I am not the only one that knows that
accidents happen and myself and others like me would rather pay extra to
help prevent another accident from happening. I really felt pretty
stupid after cutting half my thumb off. I don't want to feel that way
again if there is a way to add the extra margin of safety.
Y'all be careful!
On 06 Mar 2014 17:00:43 GMT, Puckdropper
<puckdropper(at)yahoo(dot)com> wrote:
>
(snip)
>Even if you've got a SawStop, you must always be mindful of what the saw
>will do.
>Puckdropper
Exactly! Some 40+ years ago I got the very tip of my thumb into the
blade when I flicked a piece of waste close by as the blade was
winding down. With poor florescent lighting I realized later that you
can't always see the real edge of the blade.
Every since then I work up a good case of fear, terror and respect for
the blade before I even turn the saw on. It keeps my mind centered and
not distracted. About like holding a loaded gun with the safety off.
:-)
Gray/viejo lobo gris
Elrond Hubbard <[email protected]> wrote:
> Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet> wrote in
> news:[email protected]:
>
>>>>> This comment will undoubtedly loose the usual shitstorm of debate
>>>>> on a subject that has already been flogged to death. I am strongly
>>>>> of the opinion that having a saw with an idiot-proof feature allows
>>>>> you to be more of an idiot.
>>>>>
>>>> Said by the idiot. I am as entitled to voice my opinion as any one
>>>> here but insinuating that someone becomes more of an idiot because
>>>> his or her beliefs don't align with yours speaks volumes about you.
>>>>
>>>> If you can afford the saw it is a no brainier.
>>>
>>> Didn't call anyone an idiot, nor did I suggest that you weren't
>>> entitled to the opinion which you have expressed at least ten
>>> thousand times on this forum. Why so defensive?
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Let me quote you here.
>>
>> I am strongly of the opinion that having a saw with an
>> idiot-proof
>> feature allows you to be more of an idiot.
>>
>> To be able to be more of an idiot you first have to be an idiot. If
>> you are not an idiot at all you cannot be more of one.
>
>
> We're all idiots to some degree, Leon. For instance, some people can't
> tell the difference between a huge generalization and a personal attack.
>
>
>> So while you did not directly name names you did indicate that "having
>> a saw with an idiot-proof feature" allows a you to be more of an
>> idiot.
>>
>> You accomplished what you set out to do, offend any one recommending,
>> considering, or using a SawStop.
>
>
> All I set out to do was offer my opinion. You disagree with my opinion.
> And you go on to make your argument for the ten-thousand and one-th
> time.
>
>
>> Further you stated,
>>
>> For the last ten years I've used a table saw daily, and for
>> thirty
>> or so years prior to that, I'd used one at least a few of times a
>> week. A fewyouthful misadventures with kickback taught me respect. I'm
>> not foolhardy enough to say I can't get hurt again, but if I do, it
>> won't be because I have a false sense of security from having a saw
>> that makes a workshop safe for hot dogs.
>>
>>
>> Now certainly you understand that with all of your claimed vast years
>> of extensive and continuous use of a TS that a beginner or a person
>> clearly not as smart as you might benefit from a safer saw, one that
>> can prevent a serious cut should that person with much much much less
>> experience than you have a slip in judgement or do something foolish.
>
> Which is why all entry-level table saws are equipped with the Saw Stop,
> right? Because all first-time buyers are willing and able to shell out
> the extra $$$ that the hot-dog nicking safety device costs.
>
> No?
>
> Please elaborate.
>
>
>> You admit that with your youthful adventures with kickback, and since
>> you mentioned adventures as plural, one would deduct that either you
>> are a slow learner or that there actually are numerous possibilities
>> of being hurt on a TS. AAMOF there is not a publication that can
>> cover every possible instance of what can prevent an accident. Only
>> experience helps to fill in the gaps.
>>
>> And to sum up your way of thinking, If you get hurt using a TS, that
>> is less safe to use, it is your own fault.
>
>
>
> Absolutely. Personal responsibility is a wonderful thing. Can't
> recommend it enough. Should be taught in school, even.
>
>
>
>> Never mind the fact that
>> if you were using a safer saw you might not get hurt. Have you ever
>> considered that if you cut you finger or hand it is your fault because
>> you were not using a SawStop?
>
>
>
> Huh??? Of course it would be my fault. See above re: personal
> responsibility.
>
>
>
>> And with your comment below, you clearly have not thought out what
>> your words really mean.
>>
>> I'm not foolhardy enough to say I can't get hurt again, but if I
>> do, it won't be because I have a false sense of security from having a
>> saw that makes a workshop safe for hot dogs.
>>
>>
>> If you do get hurt again, it will absolutely be because you have a
>> false sense of security. I'm not calling you stupid but do you think
>> that you would actually do something purposely wrong? If you get hurt
>> again is will because you either purposely did something wrong or
>> because you do not have enough knowledge/experience to know that the
>> operation you are performing can harm you. Believe me, if you think
>> that you know all of the ways to prevent being harmed on the TS you
>> are the prime target of SawStop. If you know you don't know every way
>> of being harmed on a TS you are also a prime target of SawStop.
>
>
> As I said earlier, I'm not enough of a fool to think that I can't get
> hurt by a table saw. I remind myself EVERY TIME I turn the thing on. I'm
> also not enough of a fool to think that the overpriced safety device you
> defend so rabidly will prevent anything other than the type of accident
> caused by carelessness, and is not designed to prevent any of the other
> kinds of harm the thing can throw my way if I use it incorrectly.
Ok Larry, you and all of your aliases fooled a few of us for a bit.
Tyrone Tiews <[email protected]> wrote:
> Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet> wrote in
> news:[email protected]:
>
>> Now something you should be considering. You obviously are serious
>> about this hobby and plan to continue woodworking since this is going
>> to be a replacement saw. Don't ask yourself if you can afford the
>> SawStop, ask yourself if you can afford to loose a finger or the
>> expense of the ER.
>>
>> There are other fine offerings but so far none have your back should
>> you, when you , make that mistake, have a lapse in judgement, or do
>> something stupid.
>>
>> The first time the saw saves your butt is when the saw more than pays
>> for it self.
>
>
> This comment will undoubtedly loose the usual shitstorm of debate on a
> subject that has already been flogged to death. I am strongly of the
> opinion that having a saw with an idiot-proof feature allows you to be more
> of an idiot.
>
Said by the idiot. I am as entitled to voice my opinion as any one here
but insinuating that someone becomes more of an idiot because his or her
beliefs don't align with yours speaks volumes about you.
If you can afford the saw it is a no brainier.
On 3/9/2015 5:49 AM, Dr. Deb wrote:
> I know you have gotten a ton of replies, but I just got a 36" Steel City Artisan saw and love it. The built in roll around comes in handy, don't have to worry about rust, rock solid, only had to make ONE adjustment coming out of the box (one wing adjuster was a tad high), good dust collection. I simply could not be happier and the latest price was around $900 from Tool Werks.
>
> Deb
>
I laughed at my self foe responding to this post, it is over a year old.
<[email protected]> wrote:
> hey guys, i am looking to purchase a new table saw.......have a 10
> year
> old craftsman contractor saw and need to upgrade. i will have to
> put it
> into my basement with limited space, so looking for decent
> contractor saw.
> This Grizzly
> http://www.grizzly.com/products/Contractor-Style-Saw/G0732
> is the saw i am leaning towards purchasing. are there any better
> options in
> this price range?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
In this day and age you owe it to yourself to take a serious look at
SawStop products.
There are several on the wrec who have purchased SawStop within the
last
5 years who can comment on specifics.
http://tinyurl.com/m56fx57
Have fun
Lew
On 3/9/2014 10:17 AM, [email protected] wrote:
> On Sun, 09 Mar 2014 10:11:25 -0600, Max <[email protected]> wrote:
>> How many less than ten fingered woodworking people are there?
>> ( by the way, your statement about wondering doesn't require a question
>
> I know of three people here who have previously self identified with a
> tablesaw injury that could have been prevented by a SawStop if it had
> existed at the time of the injury. I'm not going to name them, but
> perhaps some will name themselves.
>
Not to pick nits but in your initial "wonder" you didn't qualify your
comment by limiting your missing fingers to "people here".
What I'm alluding to is the number of woodworkers who have cut off, or
nearly so, a finger when using a table saw. The statistic "might" be a
persuasive number when selling a potential finger saver device.
I'm not attempting to denigrate the SawStop. What I am suggesting is
that it is not only a safety decision but an economic one.
SawStop "contractor" saw: $1599.
Grizzly Hybrid table saw: http://www.grizzly.com/products/G0715P $894.
delivered.
On Sun, 09 Mar 2014 11:35:42 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>Do you have a SawStop?
I don't even have a workshop. All of my woodworking is limited to the
workbench in my living room. But, if I did have a workshop, I'd
seriously consider a SawStop or a sliding table panel saw. That being
said, my needs are different than the average woodworker.
On Sun, 09 Mar 2014 21:23:53 -0400, Bill <[email protected]>
>morning! I don't begrudge them anything, I'm sure it's a tough
>business to maintain. I could do with out the "selling by fear" sales
>tactic.
Unfortunately, until SawStop patents expire and competitors get
onboard, fear always will be one of the greatest purchaser motivators.
It's usually only for the more discerning, hard core or professional
woodworkers, that fit, finish and build quality of the SawStops comes
into play.
On Sun, 09 Mar 2014 10:11:25 -0600, Max <[email protected]> wrote:
>How many less than ten fingered woodworking people are there?
>( by the way, your statement about wondering doesn't require a question
I know of three people here who have previously self identified with a
tablesaw injury that could have been prevented by a SawStop if it had
existed at the time of the injury. I'm not going to name them, but
perhaps some will name themselves.
Update:
This is a better link:
http://tinyurl.com/cz2lu
Lew
---------------------------------------------------------
"Lew Hodgett" wrote:
>
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> hey guys, i am looking to purchase a new table saw.......have a
>> 10 year
>> old craftsman contractor saw and need to upgrade. i will have to
>> put it
>> into my basement with limited space, so looking for decent
>> contractor saw.
>> This Grizzly
>> http://www.grizzly.com/products/Contractor-Style-Saw/G0732
>> is the saw i am leaning towards purchasing. are there any better
>> options in
>> this price range?
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> In this day and age you owe it to yourself to take a serious look at
> SawStop products.
>
> There are several on the wrec who have purchased SawStop within the
> last
> 5 years who can comment on specifics.
>
> http://tinyurl.com/m56fx57
>
>
> Have fun
>
>
> Lew
>
>
>
On 3/9/2014 6:34 PM, Leon wrote:
> On 3/9/2014 7:30 PM, Larry Blanchard wrote:
>> On Sun, 09 Mar 2014 18:09:31 -0500, Leon wrote:
>>
>>> And if yu simply don't want to send any pennies Gass's way that is OK
>>> too.
>>> ;~)
>>
>> Well, there is that :-).
>>
>> But now that we've resurrected the Sawstop debate, would the original
>> poster please tell us what he decided to buy. Or did we thoroughly
>> confuse the issue?
>>
>
>
> Yeah Buckwheat, Tyrone, Max, Larry J. Which did you decide on. I think
> you know who may be all four of these guys.
I have a Unisaw with which I am well pleased...except for dust
collection. *If* I should decide that I want a new table saw I can tell
you right now that dust collection will be the deciding factor after
comparable quality.
On 3/9/2014 5:22 PM, [email protected] wrote:
> On Sun, 09 Mar 2014 13:14:50 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet>
> wrote:
>
>> On 3/9/2014 10:35 AM, [email protected] wrote:
>>> On Sun, 09 Mar 2014 11:19:11 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Sun, 09 Mar 2014 11:06:49 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>>>>> Not like everything else. The difference is the cost (and the
>>>>> patents). Let's do this again after the patents run out.
>>>>
>>>> I'm wondering how many less than ten fingered woodworking people would
>>>> agree with you?
>>>
>>> Completely irrelevant. A similar silly-statement would be "How many
>>> people who had limbs lost in car accidents, prefer they stayed home
>>> that day?". Life *is* about risk/reward, no matter how much the
>>> nanny-state tries to tell you otherwise.
>>>
>>> There is no such thing as "safe". The only question is how much are
>>> you willing to pay for each bit of "safety". When I bought my saw, I
>>> looked at a SawStop but decided that the Unisaw would look nice in the
>>> garage (nicer than the Griz). A picture of a SawStop just wouldn't
>>> cut it.
>>>
>>> Do you have a SawStop?
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> FWIW I had the same attitude and comments here as those that have not
>> yet benefited from the SawStop or see the benefit of spending and extra
>> thousand on a saw, 25 years ago.
>
> Completely irrelevant. Just because you bought into SawStop after 25
> years, doesn't mean it's the right choice for everyone else. Saying
> so is pure, unadulterated, snobbery.
No,no,no, I am not saying that every one should buy the SawStop so much
as I have a perspective from both sides and in my instance it was the
right choice for me. As far as those that have not benefited, I am
referring to those that have used a SawStop and caused it to lock up the
blade to prevent a cut. I do believe that if you were to use one and
actually have an accident that causes the brake to engage and you don't
end up at the ER you probably would agree that the SawStop is really
worth a bit more consideration.
>
>> You cut your self it is your own damn fault and you did something wrong.
>> I'll be careful and practice every rule that I have read or have been
>> taught.
>
> Of course.
>
>> Then one day I cut half my thumb off, about 15 years later SawStop is on
>> the horizon. Today I own a SawStop. Wow what did I do wrong???
>> Hummmmmm obviously I did something wrong... and it took me about one
>> year to almost cut my thumb off again before I realized what had
>> actually happened. No set of safety rules "directly" addressed what
>> went wrong. I can assure you that safety rules only cover the basics
>> and it is not unusual to be in a situation that is not specifically
>> addressed in the "rules".
>
> No set of "rules" keeps killers from killing, either. They do help (a
> lot). Not all accidents are handled by SawStop, either. Dangerous
> tools require care.
Exactly however the SawStop does help to prevent severing a body part.
>
>> Unfortunately one never really understands every conceivable way that
>> you can be injured by the TS, that is until you have an unfortunate
>> accident, IF you have an accident. No one ever tries to have an
>> accident but no one lives a charmed life, one with out accidents.
>
> Irrelevant. Thousands of people never do have such an accident.
I am talking any kind of accident, tripping and falling, paper cut, etc.
We all know exactly how to prevent any of these accidents but they
still happen. We become complacent or something out of our control
happens. The same can happen with the TS.
>
>> It is all a matter of choice of how safe you want your equipment to be
>> and how much you value your safety.
>
> ...and choices you have. If I had a couple of extra thousand dollars,
> at the time, I *might* have chosen SawStop, too. ...or a bandsaw. 'or
> a Festool. ;-)
>
>> All things considered, and knowing what I do about why accidents are
>> called accidents, I choose my safety over principal.
>
> SawStop only "fixes" one of the very many accidents that are lurking
> for all of us. If I used my tools as a business, my choices would be
> very different.
This is very true.
>
>> So for anyone that has not yet been convinced that a SawStop is a smart
>> investment or an investment worth saving up for, I totally understand, I
>> have been in your shoes.
>
> That's really my point. Choice is good. In a decade, when the Gass
> patents run out, I may trade.
So because you mentioned Gass is this more of an emotional decision
given many don't care for the way he operates? Or do you honestly
believe that with patent depletion that competition will drive the
prices down? Have you considered what inflation will do to the pricing?
For example and these are just close comparisons, about 10-12 years ago
the PM2000 with 50" fence and 3hp motor was approximately $2000. Today
Woodcraft offers it for $3364 before the current 15% sale discount.
in 2000 a similar Jet was $1300 today, $2449 before the 15% sale
discount. You can probably expect for prices to do the same in the
next 10 years and that is going to put those particular TS's in excess
of the price of an industrial SawStop today, $3999. For a more
comparable Professional SawStop, $2999. today. And yes, the SawStop
does compare in quality to the saws mentioned. It is not a budget built
machine.
Just something to consider. Certainly the SawStop will be more
expensive later on too but there is no guarantee that the competition
will offer some type of similar safety feature then either, should you
find that you want a saw with that feature. Something to remember, all
of those competitors had the opportunity to have the SawStop technology
before SawStop considered building their own saw to compete. They did
not want it then, they may not want it later. Anyway none of the above
is certain to happen but by the same token is not a stretch of the
imagination either.
And if yu simply don't want to send any pennies Gass's way that is OK
too. ;~)
On 3/9/2014 7:30 PM, Larry Blanchard wrote:
> On Sun, 09 Mar 2014 18:09:31 -0500, Leon wrote:
>
>> And if yu simply don't want to send any pennies Gass's way that is OK
>> too.
>> ;~)
>
> Well, there is that :-).
>
> But now that we've resurrected the Sawstop debate, would the original
> poster please tell us what he decided to buy. Or did we thoroughly
> confuse the issue?
>
Yeah Buckwheat, Tyrone, Max, Larry J. Which did you decide on. I think
you know who may be all four of these guys.
On Sun, 09 Mar 2014 13:14:50 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet>
wrote:
>On 3/9/2014 10:35 AM, [email protected] wrote:
>> On Sun, 09 Mar 2014 11:19:11 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>>
>>> On Sun, 09 Mar 2014 11:06:49 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>>>> Not like everything else. The difference is the cost (and the
>>>> patents). Let's do this again after the patents run out.
>>>
>>> I'm wondering how many less than ten fingered woodworking people would
>>> agree with you?
>>
>> Completely irrelevant. A similar silly-statement would be "How many
>> people who had limbs lost in car accidents, prefer they stayed home
>> that day?". Life *is* about risk/reward, no matter how much the
>> nanny-state tries to tell you otherwise.
>>
>> There is no such thing as "safe". The only question is how much are
>> you willing to pay for each bit of "safety". When I bought my saw, I
>> looked at a SawStop but decided that the Unisaw would look nice in the
>> garage (nicer than the Griz). A picture of a SawStop just wouldn't
>> cut it.
>>
>> Do you have a SawStop?
>>
>>
>
>
>FWIW I had the same attitude and comments here as those that have not
>yet benefited from the SawStop or see the benefit of spending and extra
>thousand on a saw, 25 years ago.
Completely irrelevant. Just because you bought into SawStop after 25
years, doesn't mean it's the right choice for everyone else. Saying
so is pure, unadulterated, snobbery.
>You cut your self it is your own damn fault and you did something wrong.
> I'll be careful and practice every rule that I have read or have been
>taught.
Of course.
>Then one day I cut half my thumb off, about 15 years later SawStop is on
>the horizon. Today I own a SawStop. Wow what did I do wrong???
>Hummmmmm obviously I did something wrong... and it took me about one
>year to almost cut my thumb off again before I realized what had
>actually happened. No set of safety rules "directly" addressed what
>went wrong. I can assure you that safety rules only cover the basics
>and it is not unusual to be in a situation that is not specifically
>addressed in the "rules".
No set of "rules" keeps killers from killing, either. They do help (a
lot). Not all accidents are handled by SawStop, either. Dangerous
tools require care.
>Unfortunately one never really understands every conceivable way that
>you can be injured by the TS, that is until you have an unfortunate
>accident, IF you have an accident. No one ever tries to have an
>accident but no one lives a charmed life, one with out accidents.
Irrelevant. Thousands of people never do have such an accident.
>It is all a matter of choice of how safe you want your equipment to be
>and how much you value your safety.
...and choices you have. If I had a couple of extra thousand dollars,
at the time, I *might* have chosen SawStop, too. ...or a bandsaw. 'or
a Festool. ;-)
>All things considered, and knowing what I do about why accidents are
>called accidents, I choose my safety over principal.
SawStop only "fixes" one of the very many accidents that are lurking
for all of us. If I used my tools as a business, my choices would be
very different.
>So for anyone that has not yet been convinced that a SawStop is a smart
>investment or an investment worth saving up for, I totally understand, I
>have been in your shoes.
That's really my point. Choice is good. In a decade, when the Gass
patents run out, I may trade.
>And FWIW if any one believes that you will get a false sense of security
>by using a SawStop TS I can assure you that I have not. There is
>something about a blade spinning at 100 MPH that is very real and still
>very intimidating.
>
>Why do I preach the SawStop? I am not the only one that knows that
>accidents happen and myself and others like me would rather pay extra to
>help prevent another accident from happening. I really felt pretty
>stupid after cutting half my thumb off. I don't want to feel that way
>again if there is a way to add the extra margin of safety.
>
>Y'all be careful!
>
No doubt!
On Sun, 09 Mar 2014 12:10:24 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>On Sun, 09 Mar 2014 11:35:42 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>>Do you have a SawStop?
>
>I don't even have a workshop. All of my woodworking is limited to the
>workbench in my living room. But, if I did have a workshop, I'd
>seriously consider a SawStop or a sliding table panel saw. That being
>said, my needs are different than the average woodworker.
So you admit that it's not all that cut-and-dried; there *is* a
decision to be made.
On 3/10/2014 6:36 PM, [email protected] wrote:
> On Sun, 09 Mar 2014 19:11:06 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet>
> wrote:
>
>> On 3/9/2014 6:23 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>>> On Sun, 09 Mar 2014 18:15:05 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 3/9/2014 5:05 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>>>>> On Sun, 09 Mar 2014 13:31:05 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 3/9/2014 12:18 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>>>>>>> On Sun, 09 Mar 2014 13:03:10 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Sun, 09 Mar 2014 12:42:21 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Fact, Jack. That's *exactly* the decision I was confronted with.
>>>>>>>>> $1600 for the Unisaw - $3500 for the "equivalent" SawStop. The $1600
>>>>>>>>> was do-able (up from the $1400 for the budgeted Griz). $3500 would
>>>>>>>>> have had me laughed out of the "capital acquisition" meeting.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> As usual, your fact are full of holes.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Now you're calling me a liar. Figures.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Powermatic PM2000 ~ $3000
>>>>>>>> Delta 36-L352 ~ $3000
>>>>>>>> SawStop Professional cabinet saw ~ $3000
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> http://www.consumersearch.com/table-saw-reviews/cabinet-saws
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'm telling you WHAT MY DECISION WAS. GOT IT?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The REAL TRUTH is that MOST SawStop naysayers like you are too busy
>>>>>>>> letting your emotions overrule your common sense. You hate GASS'
>>>>>>>> business tactics so much that you'll consider any excuse to exclude a
>>>>>>>> SawStop from your purchasing condition.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Bullshit. Like most suck-ups, you're talking out both sides of your
>>>>>>> mouth. You admit that price is an issue and that there is a decision
>>>>>>> to be made, yet you denigrate those who don't agree with a choice
>>>>>>> you've NEVER MADE and probably never will.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I don't care that some love SawStop. Sobeit. Their decision.
>>>>>>> However, when some know-nothing jumps into the fray, talking out both
>>>>>>> sided of his mouth, it's really funny.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It does speak volumes to actually have stepped up and bought the saw. I
>>>>>> did.
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes, it means you weighed the choices and decided that it was worth
>>>>> it. I'm perfectly fine with that, as long as that choice exists.
>>>>>
>>>>>> Every one is entitled to their opinion with out being attacked and or
>>>>>> being compared to an idiot or the possibility of being more of an idiot.
>>>>>
>>>>> Well, that's really at the bottom of my point. Choice is a good
>>>>> thing.
>>>>>
>>>>>> Experience trumps, "what he said" or going with the popular consensus,
>>>>>> every time.
>>>>>
>>>>> AGW is pretty popular but it doesn't make it right. Socialism is
>>>>> pretty popular, right now, too.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I think where you and I may be at odds on this discussion is that you
>>>> might think that "I" think the SawStop should be in every ones shop. I
>>>> don't believe that to the extent that everyone must have one in their
>>>> shop.
>>>
>>> You've certainly made that implication, in the past and really are
>>> quite close to it in this.
>>
>> Well way way back when I thought it was a good enough idea to make
>> mandatory. I have changed my mind on that given the implications that if
>> you give them an inch they will take a mile.
>
> There is lots not to like about the nanny state.
>
>> I never liked the method
>> of the product being marketed after being turned down by the other
>> builders.
>
> Not sure I follow this sentence.
>
>> But I am quite flexible in my thinking. If you can show me
>> valid reasoning I will consider it but I prefer to leave the emotional
>> side of reasoning to my wife, and she would whole heartily agree.
>>
> "Cost vs. benefit" is emotional?
>>>
>>>> I think it would be good if the competition would have partnered
>>>> with SawStop to begin with and then every one could have had the choice
>>>> of having the technology "or not" in the brands of their choice.
>>>
>>> Gass had no intention of making it available with "reasonable and
>>> non-discriminatory" conditions.
>>
>> Well that is here say. Since no actual contracts were negotiated no one
>> really knows what the contracts would have said. Naturally a
>> manufacturer will ask the highest price that they think they can get.
>
> The cost was obviously more than the makers thought it was worth. The
> numbers thrown around were way out of line.
>
>> And one of the manufacturers did agree to the some kind of terms but
>> something, and no one knows what that some thing was, did cause the deal
>> to fall through the cracks.
>
> The proof is in the (empty bowl of) pudding.
>
>> I highly suspect there was some agreement,
>> by those that were approached, to not accept the offers and force this
>> new guy out. Little did any of them know just how successful Gass would
>> be in producing his own product and is also suspect they are all
>> probably rethinking the opportunity missed.
>> In a nut shell no one knows what any of the negotiated deals would have
>> been.
>>
> Gass' power play with the FTC tells a lot.
It occurs to me to wonder whether the other saw manufacturers considered
this:
If they began installing the SawStop device on their machines and
someone with a previous machine lost a finger and sued because his
machine wasn't recalled and retrofitted with the device...well...you know.
On Mon, 10 Mar 2014 12:03:44 -0400, "Lee Michaels"
<leemichaels*nadaspam* at comcast dot net> wrote:
>I find it interesting that a store is selling a quality product and you
>reduce this whole marketing and retailing approach as a "selling by fear"
>sales tactic. Maybe it is just a sell a quality product because it makes
>sense for our demographic and targeted market. Remember, you can get the
>cheaper saw many other places. Not that many places to get a SawStop.
Huh? Of the four places I frequent in the Atlanta area, three carry
SawStop. The same retailers who carry Festool. ;-) Even Amazon
carries SawStop (sold by Amazon, not one of the other three).
On Sun, 09 Mar 2014 20:42:00 -0500, Swingman <[email protected]> wrote:
>Most of the jury pool is sufficiently dumbed down to believe anything a
>lawyer tells them; and it is unlikely that they have ever operated a
>table saw, or even seen one, since shop classes were considered too
>dangerous when they were little yuppies-in-training.
I've been wondering. We've all heard details of the law suits where
they've awarded large money amounts in non-SawStop tablesaw injuries.
Has anybody seen any statistics where awards have been minimal in
other similar types of law suits?
In other words, how many similar suits have been a failure because
jurors were not sufficiently dumbed down?
On Sun, 09 Mar 2014 19:11:06 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet>
wrote:
>On 3/9/2014 6:23 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>> On Sun, 09 Mar 2014 18:15:05 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 3/9/2014 5:05 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>>>> On Sun, 09 Mar 2014 13:31:05 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 3/9/2014 12:18 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>>>>>> On Sun, 09 Mar 2014 13:03:10 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Sun, 09 Mar 2014 12:42:21 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>>>>>>>> Fact, Jack. That's *exactly* the decision I was confronted with.
>>>>>>>> $1600 for the Unisaw - $3500 for the "equivalent" SawStop. The $1600
>>>>>>>> was do-able (up from the $1400 for the budgeted Griz). $3500 would
>>>>>>>> have had me laughed out of the "capital acquisition" meeting.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> As usual, your fact are full of holes.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Now you're calling me a liar. Figures.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Powermatic PM2000 ~ $3000
>>>>>>> Delta 36-L352 ~ $3000
>>>>>>> SawStop Professional cabinet saw ~ $3000
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://www.consumersearch.com/table-saw-reviews/cabinet-saws
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm telling you WHAT MY DECISION WAS. GOT IT?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The REAL TRUTH is that MOST SawStop naysayers like you are too busy
>>>>>>> letting your emotions overrule your common sense. You hate GASS'
>>>>>>> business tactics so much that you'll consider any excuse to exclude a
>>>>>>> SawStop from your purchasing condition.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Bullshit. Like most suck-ups, you're talking out both sides of your
>>>>>> mouth. You admit that price is an issue and that there is a decision
>>>>>> to be made, yet you denigrate those who don't agree with a choice
>>>>>> you've NEVER MADE and probably never will.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I don't care that some love SawStop. Sobeit. Their decision.
>>>>>> However, when some know-nothing jumps into the fray, talking out both
>>>>>> sided of his mouth, it's really funny.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> It does speak volumes to actually have stepped up and bought the saw. I
>>>>> did.
>>>>
>>>> Yes, it means you weighed the choices and decided that it was worth
>>>> it. I'm perfectly fine with that, as long as that choice exists.
>>>>
>>>>> Every one is entitled to their opinion with out being attacked and or
>>>>> being compared to an idiot or the possibility of being more of an idiot.
>>>>
>>>> Well, that's really at the bottom of my point. Choice is a good
>>>> thing.
>>>>
>>>>> Experience trumps, "what he said" or going with the popular consensus,
>>>>> every time.
>>>>
>>>> AGW is pretty popular but it doesn't make it right. Socialism is
>>>> pretty popular, right now, too.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I think where you and I may be at odds on this discussion is that you
>>> might think that "I" think the SawStop should be in every ones shop. I
>>> don't believe that to the extent that everyone must have one in their
>>> shop.
>>
>> You've certainly made that implication, in the past and really are
>> quite close to it in this.
>
>Well way way back when I thought it was a good enough idea to make
>mandatory. I have changed my mind on that given the implications that if
>you give them an inch they will take a mile.
There is lots not to like about the nanny state.
>I never liked the method
>of the product being marketed after being turned down by the other
>builders.
Not sure I follow this sentence.
>But I am quite flexible in my thinking. If you can show me
>valid reasoning I will consider it but I prefer to leave the emotional
>side of reasoning to my wife, and she would whole heartily agree.
>
"Cost vs. benefit" is emotional?
>>
>>> I think it would be good if the competition would have partnered
>>> with SawStop to begin with and then every one could have had the choice
>>> of having the technology "or not" in the brands of their choice.
>>
>> Gass had no intention of making it available with "reasonable and
>> non-discriminatory" conditions.
>
>Well that is here say. Since no actual contracts were negotiated no one
>really knows what the contracts would have said. Naturally a
>manufacturer will ask the highest price that they think they can get.
The cost was obviously more than the makers thought it was worth. The
numbers thrown around were way out of line.
>And one of the manufacturers did agree to the some kind of terms but
>something, and no one knows what that some thing was, did cause the deal
>to fall through the cracks.
The proof is in the (empty bowl of) pudding.
> I highly suspect there was some agreement,
>by those that were approached, to not accept the offers and force this
>new guy out. Little did any of them know just how successful Gass would
>be in producing his own product and is also suspect they are all
>probably rethinking the opportunity missed.
>In a nut shell no one knows what any of the negotiated deals would have
>been.
>
Gass' power play with the FTC tells a lot.
>>
>>> I prefer to leave the political aspect out of the discussion.
>>
>> Impossible. It is at its heart a political discussion.
>
>Perhaps impossible for you but I have no problem with simply looking at
>the product. Now if you really want to get pissed off lets consider the
>fact that we no longer have a choice of buying health care or not. At
>least with the SawStop the intentions were not to mandate that every
>citizen of the US be required to buy a SawStop even if they did not ever
>have any intention of buying any woodworking equipment what so ever.
>
I don't see a lot of difference. Show me where either is in the
Constitution as an "enumerated power".
On Thu, 13 Mar 2014 20:43:33 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>Keep it up. There may still be someone out there who doesn't know
>what an ass you are.
Just have to keep it going don't you? I replied to Swingman half
jokingly and you figured you had to jump in with another hit.
You truly are an emotionally driven, senile old fool aren't you?
On 3/10/2014 10:29 PM, Max wrote:
> On 3/10/2014 6:36 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>> On Sun, 09 Mar 2014 19:11:06 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 3/9/2014 6:23 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>>>> On Sun, 09 Mar 2014 18:15:05 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 3/9/2014 5:05 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>>>>>> On Sun, 09 Mar 2014 13:31:05 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 3/9/2014 12:18 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Sun, 09 Mar 2014 13:03:10 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 09 Mar 2014 12:42:21 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Fact, Jack. That's *exactly* the decision I was confronted with.
>>>>>>>>>> $1600 for the Unisaw - $3500 for the "equivalent" SawStop.
>>>>>>>>>> The $1600
>>>>>>>>>> was do-able (up from the $1400 for the budgeted Griz). $3500
>>>>>>>>>> would
>>>>>>>>>> have had me laughed out of the "capital acquisition" meeting.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> As usual, your fact are full of holes.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Now you're calling me a liar. Figures.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Powermatic PM2000 ~ $3000
>>>>>>>>> Delta 36-L352 ~ $3000
>>>>>>>>> SawStop Professional cabinet saw ~ $3000
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> http://www.consumersearch.com/table-saw-reviews/cabinet-saws
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I'm telling you WHAT MY DECISION WAS. GOT IT?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The REAL TRUTH is that MOST SawStop naysayers like you are too
>>>>>>>>> busy
>>>>>>>>> letting your emotions overrule your common sense. You hate GASS'
>>>>>>>>> business tactics so much that you'll consider any excuse to
>>>>>>>>> exclude a
>>>>>>>>> SawStop from your purchasing condition.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Bullshit. Like most suck-ups, you're talking out both sides of
>>>>>>>> your
>>>>>>>> mouth. You admit that price is an issue and that there is a
>>>>>>>> decision
>>>>>>>> to be made, yet you denigrate those who don't agree with a choice
>>>>>>>> you've NEVER MADE and probably never will.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I don't care that some love SawStop. Sobeit. Their decision.
>>>>>>>> However, when some know-nothing jumps into the fray, talking out
>>>>>>>> both
>>>>>>>> sided of his mouth, it's really funny.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It does speak volumes to actually have stepped up and bought the
>>>>>>> saw. I
>>>>>>> did.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yes, it means you weighed the choices and decided that it was worth
>>>>>> it. I'm perfectly fine with that, as long as that choice exists.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Every one is entitled to their opinion with out being attacked
>>>>>>> and or
>>>>>>> being compared to an idiot or the possibility of being more of an
>>>>>>> idiot.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Well, that's really at the bottom of my point. Choice is a good
>>>>>> thing.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Experience trumps, "what he said" or going with the popular
>>>>>>> consensus,
>>>>>>> every time.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> AGW is pretty popular but it doesn't make it right. Socialism is
>>>>>> pretty popular, right now, too.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I think where you and I may be at odds on this discussion is that you
>>>>> might think that "I" think the SawStop should be in every ones
>>>>> shop. I
>>>>> don't believe that to the extent that everyone must have one in their
>>>>> shop.
>>>>
>>>> You've certainly made that implication, in the past and really are
>>>> quite close to it in this.
>>>
>>> Well way way back when I thought it was a good enough idea to make
>>> mandatory. I have changed my mind on that given the implications that if
>>> you give them an inch they will take a mile.
>>
>> There is lots not to like about the nanny state.
>>
>>> I never liked the method
>>> of the product being marketed after being turned down by the other
>>> builders.
>>
>> Not sure I follow this sentence.
>>
>>> But I am quite flexible in my thinking. If you can show me
>>> valid reasoning I will consider it but I prefer to leave the emotional
>>> side of reasoning to my wife, and she would whole heartily agree.
>>>
>> "Cost vs. benefit" is emotional?
>>>>
>>>>> I think it would be good if the competition would have partnered
>>>>> with SawStop to begin with and then every one could have had the
>>>>> choice
>>>>> of having the technology "or not" in the brands of their choice.
>>>>
>>>> Gass had no intention of making it available with "reasonable and
>>>> non-discriminatory" conditions.
>>>
>>> Well that is here say. Since no actual contracts were negotiated no one
>>> really knows what the contracts would have said. Naturally a
>>> manufacturer will ask the highest price that they think they can get.
>>
>> The cost was obviously more than the makers thought it was worth. The
>> numbers thrown around were way out of line.
>>
>>> And one of the manufacturers did agree to the some kind of terms but
>>> something, and no one knows what that some thing was, did cause the deal
>>> to fall through the cracks.
>>
>> The proof is in the (empty bowl of) pudding.
>>
>>> I highly suspect there was some agreement,
>>> by those that were approached, to not accept the offers and force this
>>> new guy out. Little did any of them know just how successful Gass would
>>> be in producing his own product and is also suspect they are all
>>> probably rethinking the opportunity missed.
>>> In a nut shell no one knows what any of the negotiated deals would have
>>> been.
>>>
>> Gass' power play with the FTC tells a lot.
>
> It occurs to me to wonder whether the other saw manufacturers considered
> this:
> If they began installing the SawStop device on their machines and
> someone with a previous machine lost a finger and sued because his
> machine wasn't recalled and retrofitted with the device...well...you know.
>
>
Precisely. With any business decision and deal and especially as
monumental as this one, there are many many other cost factors to be
considered other than simply the cost of the license.
On 3/10/2014 7:36 PM, [email protected] wrote:
> On Sun, 09 Mar 2014 19:11:06 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet>
> wrote:
>
>> On 3/9/2014 6:23 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>>> On Sun, 09 Mar 2014 18:15:05 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 3/9/2014 5:05 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>>>>> On Sun, 09 Mar 2014 13:31:05 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 3/9/2014 12:18 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>>>>>>> On Sun, 09 Mar 2014 13:03:10 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Sun, 09 Mar 2014 12:42:21 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Fact, Jack. That's *exactly* the decision I was confronted with.
>>>>>>>>> $1600 for the Unisaw - $3500 for the "equivalent" SawStop. The $1600
>>>>>>>>> was do-able (up from the $1400 for the budgeted Griz). $3500 would
>>>>>>>>> have had me laughed out of the "capital acquisition" meeting.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> As usual, your fact are full of holes.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Now you're calling me a liar. Figures.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Powermatic PM2000 ~ $3000
>>>>>>>> Delta 36-L352 ~ $3000
>>>>>>>> SawStop Professional cabinet saw ~ $3000
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> http://www.consumersearch.com/table-saw-reviews/cabinet-saws
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'm telling you WHAT MY DECISION WAS. GOT IT?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The REAL TRUTH is that MOST SawStop naysayers like you are too busy
>>>>>>>> letting your emotions overrule your common sense. You hate GASS'
>>>>>>>> business tactics so much that you'll consider any excuse to exclude a
>>>>>>>> SawStop from your purchasing condition.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Bullshit. Like most suck-ups, you're talking out both sides of your
>>>>>>> mouth. You admit that price is an issue and that there is a decision
>>>>>>> to be made, yet you denigrate those who don't agree with a choice
>>>>>>> you've NEVER MADE and probably never will.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I don't care that some love SawStop. Sobeit. Their decision.
>>>>>>> However, when some know-nothing jumps into the fray, talking out both
>>>>>>> sided of his mouth, it's really funny.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It does speak volumes to actually have stepped up and bought the saw. I
>>>>>> did.
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes, it means you weighed the choices and decided that it was worth
>>>>> it. I'm perfectly fine with that, as long as that choice exists.
>>>>>
>>>>>> Every one is entitled to their opinion with out being attacked and or
>>>>>> being compared to an idiot or the possibility of being more of an idiot.
>>>>>
>>>>> Well, that's really at the bottom of my point. Choice is a good
>>>>> thing.
>>>>>
>>>>>> Experience trumps, "what he said" or going with the popular consensus,
>>>>>> every time.
>>>>>
>>>>> AGW is pretty popular but it doesn't make it right. Socialism is
>>>>> pretty popular, right now, too.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I think where you and I may be at odds on this discussion is that you
>>>> might think that "I" think the SawStop should be in every ones shop. I
>>>> don't believe that to the extent that everyone must have one in their
>>>> shop.
>>>
>>> You've certainly made that implication, in the past and really are
>>> quite close to it in this.
>>
>> Well way way back when I thought it was a good enough idea to make
>> mandatory. I have changed my mind on that given the implications that if
>> you give them an inch they will take a mile.
>
> There is lots not to like about the nanny state.
Yes there are LOT"S not to like. Given that, there is a thing or two
that is of benefit to some one.
>
>> I never liked the method
>> of the product being marketed after being turned down by the other
>> builders.
>
> Not sure I follow this sentence.
Gass lobbied to have his technology mandated after being turned down and
or the deals fell through prior to him actually manufacturing the
product himself.
And on another note it could be assumed that given the methods he used
to bring the product to market and the fact that he is a patent attorney
might dictate that his product be damn well effective and no cost
cutting measures be used if there is possibility of those measures
affecting the performance of the saw. Imagine the vengeance that would
be directed toward him or his company should there be and injury and any
proof of tampering or change of design to save production costs.
>
>> But I am quite flexible in my thinking. If you can show me
>> valid reasoning I will consider it but I prefer to leave the emotional
>> side of reasoning to my wife, and she would whole heartily agree.
>>
> "Cost vs. benefit" is emotional?
In my case more of a deduction. Given my previous profession and
decision making on a daily basis there was not time for emotion. I
still think this way, for the most part, and probably why I have a bit
of a different attitude towards the SawStop political side.
>>>
>>>> I think it would be good if the competition would have partnered
>>>> with SawStop to begin with and then every one could have had the choice
>>>> of having the technology "or not" in the brands of their choice.
>>>
>>> Gass had no intention of making it available with "reasonable and
>>> non-discriminatory" conditions.
That would be an assumption but not a fact. Because no contracts are in
effect no one knows what might have been. Believing/thinking that he
had no intention of being flexible during a real negotiation would be
like a similar assumption that the company that he actually did have a
deal with was strong armed by the other manufacturers to not go through
with the agreement. A reasonable assumption but only an assumption.
>>
>> Well that is here say. Since no actual contracts were negotiated no one
>> really knows what the contracts would have said. Naturally a
>> manufacturer will ask the highest price that they think they can get.
>
> The cost was obviously more than the makers thought it was worth. The
> numbers thrown around were way out of line.
I do believe that cost was the prime factor. BUT not necessarily only
the cost of paying Gass. There are many many other costs that could
have and probably were factored in. What would the cost be for
additional product liability for something that they had not developed
themselves. What would be the cost of having double inventory and
manufacturing capability for the saws with and with out technology.
What would tooling cost to reinvent their product to be compatible with
the technology. There are countless down the road expenses that come
into play other than simply the cost of to use the technology. Changing
your product is quite expensive in itself. You really don't see many
changes in these type products through out the life of the basic design.
The Unisaw saw is quite old and kept it's basic design for many many
years. Only recently did Delta change that design drastically and it
appears that the new design is not on every ones wish list. Sales of
the old Unisaw design were probably better than the new Unisaw design.
>
>> And one of the manufacturers did agree to the some kind of terms but
>> something, and no one knows what that some thing was, did cause the deal
>> to fall through the cracks.
>
> The proof is in the (empty bowl of) pudding.
Well there is no proof actually. That would be another assumption. Do
you know exactly why the deal fell through? Have you seen the written
reason that the company used to withdraw from the agreement?
>
>> I highly suspect there was some agreement,
>> by those that were approached, to not accept the offers and force this
>> new guy out. Little did any of them know just how successful Gass would
>> be in producing his own product and is also suspect they are all
>> probably rethinking the opportunity missed.
>> In a nut shell no one knows what any of the negotiated deals would have
>> been.
>>
> Gass' power play with the FTC tells a lot.
Yes it does seem to look that way. And my thoughts just above, about
why the deal/deals fell through, are just an assumption.
>>>
>>>> I prefer to leave the political aspect out of the discussion.
>>>
>>> Impossible. It is at its heart a political discussion.
>>
>> Perhaps impossible for you but I have no problem with simply looking at
>> the product. Now if you really want to get pissed off lets consider the
>> fact that we no longer have a choice of buying health care or not. At
>> least with the SawStop the intentions were not to mandate that every
>> citizen of the US be required to buy a SawStop even if they did not ever
>> have any intention of buying any woodworking equipment what so ever.
>>
> I don't see a lot of difference. Show me where either is in the
> Constitution as an "enumerated power".
Not sure I follow, could you be more explicit?
On Sun, 09 Mar 2014 06:23:45 -0700, jo4hn <[email protected]>
>Leon, Jeff,
>Time to step back and take a deep breath. In fact most of the
>contributors to this thread should do so. When reasoned discourse and
>emotional involvement meet each other, the "reasoned" part seems to fade.
But then, what fun would there be?
On Sun, 09 Mar 2014 18:09:31 -0500, Leon wrote:
> And if yu simply don't want to send any pennies Gass's way that is OK
> too.
> ;~)
Well, there is that :-).
But now that we've resurrected the Sawstop debate, would the original
poster please tell us what he decided to buy. Or did we thoroughly
confuse the issue?
--
Where have all the flowers gone? Pete Seeger 1919-2014
Lew Hodgett wrote:
> Update:
>
> This is a better link:
>
> http://tinyurl.com/cz2lu
>
---------------------------------------------------------
"Leon" wrote:
> Excellent suggestion Lew! But sawstop.com is a shorter URL.
--------------------------------------------------------
Not really.
1) Do a Google on "saw stop". 9 keystrokes including space
2) Highlight and select sawstop.com using mouse. No keystrokes
3) Highlight "tinyurl" in toolbar using mouse. No keystrokes
4) Place copy of tinyurl in clipboard using mouse. No keystrokes
5) Paste tinyurl in e-mail. No keystrokes
Grand total: 9 keystrokes + 5 mouse commands.
Devil made me do it <G>
Lew
Tyrone Tiews <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:
>
> This comment will undoubtedly loose the usual shitstorm of debate on a
> subject that has already been flogged to death. I am strongly of the
> opinion that having a saw with an idiot-proof feature allows you to be
> more of an idiot.
>
> Bank the $1000, and never use your saw without reminding yourself that
> it is capable of causing you grievous bodily harm. Not everyone who
> uses a table saw will lose a finger. But any woodworker who fails to
> be vigilant might.
>
> The real question: Right-tilt or left?
Even if you've got a SawStop, you must always be mindful of what the saw
will do. The blade may not as readily remove fingers (but it will hurt),
but it will happily throw a piece of wood at you at amazing speed.
This quote comes to mind:
"Never forget who you are. You are ninja. You must always practice the
art of invisibility." -- Splinter, Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles II
(copied from: http://www.script-o-rama.com/movie_scripts/t/teenage-
mutant-ninja-turtles-ooze-script.html
Puckdropper
--
Make it to fit, don't make it fit.
On 3/7/2014 10:17 PM, [email protected] wrote:
> On 08 Mar 2014 02:58:43 GMT, Tyrone Tiews <[email protected]> wrote:
>> enough to say I can't get hurt again, but if I do, it won't be because I
>> have a false sense of security from having a saw that makes a workshop safe
>> for hot dogs.
>
> Do you wear a seatbelt when you're driving Tyrone? Do you have a smoke
> detector or carbon monoxide detector in your home Tyrone? The SawStop
> is a safety device just like anything else. If all these things are
> likely to give you a false sense of security then you've got a
> serious problem.
>
The degree to which any safety device contributes to the utilitarian
value to the owner varies with the ....owner.
I would question the value of the Saw Stop safety device to someone who
is extraordinarily safety conscious when operating any device that
presents a danger.
Am I prepared to trade some expensive and desirable tool in exchange for
the safety a SawStop offers (say a jointer and a less expensive table
saw.)
(actually, I am since I can afford to)
But for the individual who has to scrape together money for tools the
choice might not be so easy.
Having said that, if I were in the market for a new table saw the
determining factor for my choice would be the quality of the tool.
None of the foregoing should be interpreted as a criticism of the
SawStop's quality.
(and, by the way, insurance data shows that seat belts apparently do
cause drivers to develop a false sense of security. That's why people
often do not buckle up for short trips but when they hit the freeway
they do buckle up.)
On 3/9/2014 9:19 AM, [email protected] wrote:
> On Sun, 09 Mar 2014 11:06:49 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>> Not like everything else. The difference is the cost (and the
>> patents). Let's do this again after the patents run out.
>
> I'm wondering how many less than ten fingered woodworking people would
> agree with you?
>
How many less than ten fingered woodworking people are there?
( by the way, your statement about wondering doesn't require a question
mark) ;-)
"Lew Hodgett" wrote:
> Update:
>
> This is a better link:
>
> http://tinyurl.com/cz2lu
>
> Lew
> ---------------------------------------------------------
> "Lew Hodgett" wrote:
>>
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> hey guys, i am looking to purchase a new table saw.......have a
>>> 10 year
>>> old craftsman contractor saw and need to upgrade. i will have to
>>> put it
>>> into my basement with limited space, so looking for decent
>>> contractor saw.
>>> This Grizzly
>>> http://www.grizzly.com/products/Contractor-Style-Saw/G0732
>>> is the saw i am leaning towards purchasing. are there any better
>>> options in
>>> this price range?
>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> In this day and age you owe it to yourself to take a serious look
>> at
>> SawStop products.
>>
>> There are several on the wrec who have purchased SawStop within the
>> last
>> 5 years who can comment on specifics.
>>
>> http://tinyurl.com/m56fx57
>>
>>
>> Have fun
>>
>>
>> Lew
---------------------------------------------------------
Who would have thought this simple post would generate 170 responses?
Lew
>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> hey guys, i am looking to purchase a new table saw.......have a
>>>> 10 year
>>>> old craftsman contractor saw and need to upgrade. i will have to
>>>> put it
>>>> into my basement with limited space, so looking for decent
>>>> contractor saw.
>>>> This Grizzly
>>>> http://www.grizzly.com/products/Contractor-Style-Saw/G0732
>>>> is the saw i am leaning towards purchasing. are there any better
>>>> options in
>>>> this price range?
>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
Grizzly has this one for just a little more money and the latest issue
of Wood magazine has an article about it.
https://www.grizzly.com/products/10-Hybrid-Table-Saw-with-Riving-Knife-Polar-Bear-Series-/G0715P
http://tinyurl.com/kw4llo2
On 03/04/2014 08:28 PM, [email protected] wrote:
> hey guys, i am looking to purchase a new table saw.......have a 10 year
> old craftsman contractor saw and need to upgrade. i will have to put it
> into my basement with limited space, so looking for decent contractor saw.
> This Grizzly http://www.grizzly.com/products/Contractor-Style-Saw/G0732
> is the saw i am leaning towards purchasing. are there any better options in
> this price range? tia
>
<http://www.homedepot.com/p/RIDGID-13-Amp-10-in-Professional-Table-Saw-R4512/202500206>
--
"Socialism is a philosophy of failure,the creed of ignorance, and the
gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery"
-Winston Churchill
I'm pretty happy with my Delta hybrid, which I have had for about eight yea=
rs. IIRC, it has a 1.75 hp motor and mine is running on 110v. The only ti=
me I wish I had more oomph is ripping 2-inch hardwood; otherwise it handles=
everything nicely. When I bought it from Amazon there was an option to up=
grade to a Biesemeyer fence, but I stayed with the Delta. Plan on a 3rd pa=
rty miter gauge.
Larry
On Tuesday, March 4, 2014 9:28:34 PM UTC-6, [email protected] wrote:
> hey guys, i am looking to purchase a new table saw.......have a 10 year
>=20
> old craftsman contractor saw and need to upgrade. i will have to put it
>=20
> into my basement with limited space, so looking for decent contractor saw=
.=20
>=20
> This Grizzly http://www.grizzly.com/products/Contractor-Style-Saw/G0732 =
=20
>=20
> is the saw i am leaning towards purchasing. are there any better options=
in
>=20
> this price range? tia
Larry Blanchard <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Wed, 05 Mar 2014 19:55:51 -0600, Leon wrote:
>
>
> "allows you to be more of an idiot."
>
> "someone becomes more of an idiot"
>
> Last time I looked "allows" and "becomes" were not synonyms.
>
> And if you don't think that a belief that an activity cannot hurt one
> allows one to become more careless, I suggest you ask any psychologist.
>
> Yes, the Sawstop is a good saw. Yes, it is the safest saw on the
> market. No, it is not a revealed truth from Heaven :-).
>
> You call the OP an idiot. Woodchucker calls him a troll. Seems a bit
> harsh for what to me is a defensible point of view.
You might want to straighten out who said what. I did not call the OP an
idiot, Tirome called any one using an idiot proof machine an idiot. So by
that same token if you wear any safety gear while woodworking you are an
idiot. If you wear seat belts you are an idiot, if you don't over ride
safety features on a gas furnace you are an idiot, if you take extra steps
to insure your safety your are an idiot. In a nut shell that is what
Tirome is saying.
>
> That psychologist can also acquaint you with the proclivity of someone
> who owns a product to get defensive when the product is criticized. The
> more expensive the product, the more defensive :-).
And the psychologist will attest that those that don't like something will
also voice a less than favorable opinion, valid or not.
I have no issue with any one criticizing the SawStop, I do take offense
when that person deducts that I or any oneelse that uses one is an idiot.
On 3/7/2014 8:59 PM, Tyrone Tiews wrote:
> Leon <[email protected]> wrote in
> news:[email protected]:
>
>>> This comment will undoubtedly loose the usual shitstorm of debate on
>>> a subject that has already been flogged to death. I am strongly of
>>> the opinion that having a saw with an idiot-proof feature allows you
>>> to be more of an idiot.
>>>
>> Said by the idiot. I am as entitled to voice my opinion as any one
>> here but insinuating that someone becomes more of an idiot because his
>> or her beliefs don't align with yours speaks volumes about you.
>>
>> If you can afford the saw it is a no brainier.
>
> Didn't call anyone an idiot, nor did I suggest that you weren't entitled to
> the opinion which you have expressed at least ten thousand times on this
> forum. Why so defensive?
>
Let me quote you here.
I am strongly of the opinion that having a saw with an idiot-proof
feature allows you to be more of an idiot.
To be able to be more of an idiot you first have to be an idiot. If you
are not an idiot at all you cannot be more of one.
So while you did not directly name names you did indicate that "having a
saw with an idiot-proof feature" allows a you to be more of an idiot.
You accomplished what you set out to do, offend any one recommending,
considering, or using a SawStop.
Further you stated,
For the last ten years I've used a table saw daily, and for thirty
or so years prior to that, I'd used one at least a few of times a week.
A fewyouthful misadventures with kickback taught me respect. I'm not
foolhardy enough to say I can't get hurt again, but if I do, it won't be
because I have a false sense of security from having a saw that makes a
workshop safe for hot dogs.
Now certainly you understand that with all of your claimed vast years
of extensive and continuous use of a TS that a beginner or a person
clearly not as smart as you might benefit from a safer saw, one that can
prevent a serious cut should that person with much much much less
experience than you have a slip in judgement or do something foolish.
You admit that with your youthful adventures with kickback, and since
you mentioned adventures as plural, one would deduct that either you are
a slow learner or that there actually are numerous possibilities of
being hurt on a TS. AAMOF there is not a publication that can cover
every possible instance of what can prevent an accident. Only
experience helps to fill in the gaps.
And to sum up your way of thinking, If you get hurt using a TS, that is
less safe to use, it is your own fault. Never mind the fact that if you
were using a safer saw you might not get hurt. Have you ever considered
that if you cut you finger or hand it is your fault because you were not
using a SawStop?
And with your comment below, you clearly have not thought out what your
words really mean.
I'm not foolhardy enough to say I can't get hurt again, but if I
do, it won't be because I have a false sense of security from having a
saw that makes a workshop safe for hot dogs.
If you do get hurt again, it will absolutely be because you have a false
sense of security. I'm not calling you stupid but do you think that you
would actually do something purposely wrong? If you get hurt again is
will because you either purposely did something wrong or because you do
not have enough knowledge/experience to know that the operation you are
performing can harm you. Believe me, if you think that you know all of
the ways to prevent being harmed on the TS you are the prime target of
SawStop. If you know you don't know every way of being harmed on a TS
you are also a prime target of SawStop.
It is simply not good judgement to take blame for being hurt on TS
because of a false pride in your mind about how you think you operate a
saw safely when you have available a machine that can greatly reduce the
chance of being harmed.
I know you have gotten a ton of replies, but I just got a 36" Steel City Ar=
tisan saw and love it. The built in roll around comes in handy, don't have=
to worry about rust, rock solid, only had to make ONE adjustment coming ou=
t of the box (one wing adjuster was a tad high), good dust collection. I s=
imply could not be happier and the latest price was around $900 from Tool W=
erks.
Deb
On 3/5/2014 8:13 PM, Tyrone Tiews wrote:
> Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet> wrote in
> news:[email protected]:
>
>> Now something you should be considering. You obviously are serious
>> about this hobby and plan to continue woodworking since this is going
>> to be a replacement saw. Don't ask yourself if you can afford the
>> SawStop, ask yourself if you can afford to loose a finger or the
>> expense of the ER.
>>
>> There are other fine offerings but so far none have your back should
>> you, when you , make that mistake, have a lapse in judgement, or do
>> something stupid.
>>
>> The first time the saw saves your butt is when the saw more than pays
>> for it self.
>
>
> This comment will undoubtedly loose the usual shitstorm of debate on a
> subject that has already been flogged to death. I am strongly of the
> opinion that having a saw with an idiot-proof feature allows you to be more
> of an idiot.
>
> Bank the $1000, and never use your saw without reminding yourself that it
> is capable of causing you grievous bodily harm. Not everyone who uses a
> table saw will lose a finger. But any woodworker who fails to be vigilant
> might.
>
> The real question: Right-tilt or left?
>
The TROLL is back..
Tyrone, for you the question is whether you will cut your right or left
hand off.
--
Jeff
On Sun, 09 Mar 2014 12:42:21 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>Fact, Jack. That's *exactly* the decision I was confronted with.
>$1600 for the Unisaw - $3500 for the "equivalent" SawStop. The $1600
>was do-able (up from the $1400 for the budgeted Griz). $3500 would
>have had me laughed out of the "capital acquisition" meeting.
As usual, your fact are full of holes.
Powermatic PM2000 ~ $3000
Delta 36-L352 ~ $3000
SawStop Professional cabinet saw ~ $3000
http://www.consumersearch.com/table-saw-reviews/cabinet-saws
The REAL TRUTH is that MOST SawStop naysayers like you are too busy
letting your emotions overrule your common sense. You hate GASS'
business tactics so much that you'll consider any excuse to exclude a
SawStop from your purchasing condition.
On 3/11/2014 2:00 PM, Mike Marlow wrote:
> Leon wrote:
>
>>
>> It is absolutely a common sense thing. But many people let their
>> emotions factor in on their decisions.
>
> Well - of course we do - we are people. If you try to deny that you don't
> do the same, I'm going to have to call you on that. You may feel that you
> are totally logical, but that is only based on how you, or I, or anyone else
> views our own sense of logic. I will assure you - there is no such thing as
> a totally logical person on the face of this earth.
Hell I did not say I was totally logical Mike. LOL. I only try to
think logically and try not to let emotions/excitement enter into the
equation.
>
>
>> If you simply factor in
>> nothing but facts
>
> Caution Will Robinson... the word "facts" has lots of defintions, depending
> on the perspective of the definer.
Exactly. so shall we define Facts as a common published bit of
information. Fact or not. LOL
>
>> the choice become more clear. For example new car
>> dealers want you to take that test drive. The excitement of driving
>> a new vehicle helps to sell the vehicle. Now having said that we had
>> to help bail out GM and many people are not going to want to have any
>> thing to do with a company that had to be bailed out by the
>> government. Does this make their vehicles a bad choice? Yes if you
>> now hate GM, "maybe not' if you look strictly at the vehicle itself.
>
> Ummmmm... giving you a lot of room on this one Leon, but it really does not
> make any sense. There are lots of reasons why people would never buy
> another GM product again, from experiences, to dislike of the bailout, to
> dislike of their continued denial of problems (like the Cavalier) that are
> costing lives every year. You have painted way to broad of a brush
> statement above. Just can't accept that one.
just giving a simple example. There are plenty of reasons to buy or not
buy GM.
>>
>> This whole disagreement on the SawStop is mostly based on whether you
>> have a dislike for the SawStop product because of it's owner or if you
>> simply judge the product on it's own merits.
>
> Sorry - but wrong again Leon. People have articulated other reasons that
> may not seem so different from what you say above but you can't allow
> yourself to lump things into categories that make sense to you. Even if
> those arguments are only slightly different from what you see, they are
> still different. And - those are their thoughts.
>
>> Again if you let emotion
>> play a part of your decision making you may not get the best deal on
>> paper.
>
> Oh hell Leon - be honest - we all do that. Even you - and your wife...
>
>> As with anything you buy if you are happy with your decision
>> you got a good deal for you.
>
> Agreed!
>
>> We like to buy what we like whether
>> what we like is a good product or not. When we put aside the good
>> feeling and look only at the facts we make better decisions.
>
> There is that word "facts" again. Facts are only facts in the eye of those
> who believe in those "facts".
>
Ok that's it! When you do finally get clearance to visit you get the
"BED OF NAILS" ;~)
On Mon, 10 Mar 2014 20:48:55 -0400, Ed Pawlowski <[email protected]> wrote:
>Our workman's comp carrier is recommending SawStop and may require them
>in the future
It will be an irreversible tide. Some time ago, Lee Valley swapped all
their store's tablesaws out for SawStops. We all want to blame the
lawyers, but the insurance industry is equally as complicit.
On Tue, 11 Mar 2014 12:13:46 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet>
wrote:
>On 3/11/2014 12:02 PM, FrozenNorth wrote:
>> On 3/11/2014 12:58 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>>> On Tue, 11 Mar 2014 12:44:40 -0400, FrozenNorth
>>>> Old tank was nearly 60 years old, I put in a new tank, double walled
>>>> with a float in between, first tank leaks, float rises and I know I have
>>>> to get another tank. Just pass on the insurance.
>>>
>>> Unfortunately, that is not an option in many instances. Many or most
>>> businesses have to have insurance(s) to operate.
>>>
>> Yep, but I just passed on the oil tank coverage, still covered for all
>> the other usual stuff.
>>
>
>
>A serious question here. What if the tank leaks and causes a fire that
>damages the rest of the house? will the rest of the house be covered
>then? I think I would make darn sure that you are OK given the fact
>that the tank is no longer insured.
I'd like to see the actuaries calculate that rate. ;-)
On 3/11/2014 4:36 PM, Markem wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Mar 2014 14:10:38 -0400, "Mike Marlow"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Leon wrote:
>>> On 3/11/2014 11:58 AM, [email protected] wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 11 Mar 2014 12:44:40 -0400, FrozenNorth
>>>>> Old tank was nearly 60 years old, I put in a new tank, double walled
>>>>> with a float in between, first tank leaks, float rises and I know I
>>>>> have to get another tank. Just pass on the insurance.
>>>>
>>>> Unfortunately, that is not an option in many instances. Many or most
>>>> businesses have to have insurance(s) to operate.
>>>>
>>>
>>> And or if they have a mortgage on that property. Lenders do not let
>>> you go without protection for their investments.
>>> They will in a heart beat buy the insurance for you and add it into
>>> your escrow payments and not give a second thought to what insurance
>>> rates you will be paying.
>>
>> This whole conversation is getting way out of hand. Yes - Leon is right in
>> some respects, but not in total. Banks do not unilaterly just purchase
>> insurance that they think you need or even that insurance companys are
>> pushing. It really pays to talk to people who really know and not pay any
>> attention to internet newsgroup advice.
>
> Yes but do not let your mortgager buy flood insurance for you or any
> other insurance buy it yourself.
>
> Mark
>
Very good advise. No one cares about saving your money as much as you do.
On Tue, 11 Mar 2014 14:10:38 -0400, "Mike Marlow"
>This whole conversation is getting way out of hand. Yes - Leon is right in
>some respects, but not in total. Banks do not unilaterly just purchase
>insurance that they think you need or even that insurance companys are
>pushing. It really pays to talk to people who really know and not pay any
>attention to internet newsgroup advice.
A little off topic, but I think that might depend on what the
insurance is for and the value of what you're insuring. For a home
mortgage as an example, I believe that unless your down payment is a
certain percentage, you have to have insurance on your mortgage.
Perhaps a Canadian home owner can comment on this.
On Tue, 11 Mar 2014 15:38:18 -0400, "Mike Marlow"
>Not trying to start an argument here, but where is the logical
>and unemotional evidence behind that statement?
Not sure how I can answer that. Given the right set of circumstances,
I'd buy a SawStop in a second. While being aware of Gass' attempts to
have the SawStop mandated, the idea of it happening didn't phase me
for a second ~ even if I did live in the US. Since I feel that there's
very little I can do about something like that if it was up here, I
don't let it bother me.
When it comes to buying things, I consider myself to be as unemotional
and logical as I can get. Let me give you an example.
When I was considering the purchase of a Domino, I used Leon for much
of my information on the tool. Leon will attest to this. I must have
traded several dozen emails with him asking questions. I didn't then
and never have complained or spouted off about the cost of a Festool
product ~ as many have. Once I was satisfied with his opinion, an
opinion on tools that I trust. I went out and bought one.
I've done pretty much the same with the SawStop. I've examined them
very closely, asked questions that were important to me and prepared
myself *if* the time ever came where I would have the place where I
could use one. Never once, have I let the cost of a SawStop sway me
because my logic told me that it was an excellent tool with a safety
feature that no other tool to my knowledge could match. It just seems
logical to me. In the meantime, I use a tablesaw stored in a friend's
garage.
On Tue, 11 Mar 2014 12:10:38 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet>
wrote:
>On 3/11/2014 11:58 AM, [email protected] wrote:
>> On Tue, 11 Mar 2014 12:44:40 -0400, FrozenNorth
>>> Old tank was nearly 60 years old, I put in a new tank, double walled
>>> with a float in between, first tank leaks, float rises and I know I have
>>> to get another tank. Just pass on the insurance.
>>
>> Unfortunately, that is not an option in many instances. Many or most
>> businesses have to have insurance(s) to operate.
>>
>
>And or if they have a mortgage on that property. Lenders do not let you
>go without protection for their investments.
>They will in a heart beat buy the insurance for you and add it into your
>escrow payments and not give a second thought to what insurance rates
>you will be paying.
Yes, I had that happen once. I was paying around $300/yr for
insurance. They billed me $1500, even though I *had* insurance. The
kicker is that they were paying the premiums from escrow! That
mortgage company was as crooked as they come.
On Tue, 11 Mar 2014 14:10:38 -0400, "Mike Marlow"
<[email protected]> wrote:
>Leon wrote:
>> On 3/11/2014 11:58 AM, [email protected] wrote:
>>> On Tue, 11 Mar 2014 12:44:40 -0400, FrozenNorth
>>>> Old tank was nearly 60 years old, I put in a new tank, double walled
>>>> with a float in between, first tank leaks, float rises and I know I
>>>> have to get another tank. Just pass on the insurance.
>>>
>>> Unfortunately, that is not an option in many instances. Many or most
>>> businesses have to have insurance(s) to operate.
>>>
>>
>> And or if they have a mortgage on that property. Lenders do not let
>> you go without protection for their investments.
>> They will in a heart beat buy the insurance for you and add it into
>> your escrow payments and not give a second thought to what insurance
>> rates you will be paying.
>
>This whole conversation is getting way out of hand. Yes - Leon is right in
>some respects, but not in total. Banks do not unilaterly just purchase
>insurance that they think you need or even that insurance companys are
>pushing. It really pays to talk to people who really know and not pay any
>attention to internet newsgroup advice.
Yes but do not let your mortgager buy flood insurance for you or any
other insurance buy it yourself.
Mark
[email protected] wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Mar 2014 14:10:38 -0400, "Mike Marlow"
>> This whole conversation is getting way out of hand. Yes - Leon is
>> right in some respects, but not in total. Banks do not unilaterly
>> just purchase insurance that they think you need or even that
>> insurance companys are pushing. It really pays to talk to people
>> who really know and not pay any attention to internet newsgroup
>> advice.
>
> A little off topic, but I think that might depend on what the
> insurance is for and the value of what you're insuring. For a home
> mortgage as an example, I believe that unless your down payment is a
> certain percentage, you have to have insurance on your mortgage.
>
Down here Dave, if you have a mortgage, you have to maintain insurance.
That said - that statement has nothing at all to do with the discussion at
hand.
--
-Mike-
[email protected]
[email protected] wrote:
>
> Yes, I had that happen once. I was paying around $300/yr for
> insurance. They billed me $1500, even though I *had* insurance. The
> kicker is that they were paying the premiums from escrow! That
> mortgage company was as crooked as they come.
Tell me - was it Washington Mutual?
--
-Mike-
[email protected]
Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet> writes:
>On 3/11/2014 4:36 PM, Markem wrote:
>> On Tue, 11 Mar 2014 14:10:38 -0400, "Mike Marlow"
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> Leon wrote:
>>>> On 3/11/2014 11:58 AM, [email protected] wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, 11 Mar 2014 12:44:40 -0400, FrozenNorth
>>>>>> Old tank was nearly 60 years old, I put in a new tank, double walled
>>>>>> with a float in between, first tank leaks, float rises and I know I
>>>>>> have to get another tank. Just pass on the insurance.
>>>>>
>>>>> Unfortunately, that is not an option in many instances. Many or most
>>>>> businesses have to have insurance(s) to operate.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> And or if they have a mortgage on that property. Lenders do not let
>>>> you go without protection for their investments.
>>>> They will in a heart beat buy the insurance for you and add it into
>>>> your escrow payments and not give a second thought to what insurance
>>>> rates you will be paying.
>>>
>>> This whole conversation is getting way out of hand. Yes - Leon is right in
>>> some respects, but not in total. Banks do not unilaterly just purchase
>>> insurance that they think you need or even that insurance companys are
>>> pushing. It really pays to talk to people who really know and not pay any
>>> attention to internet newsgroup advice.
>>
>> Yes but do not let your mortgager buy flood insurance for you or any
>> other insurance buy it yourself.
>>
>> Mark
>>
>Very good advise. No one cares about saving your money as much as you do.
My State Farm guy called six months ago, and offered some advice that
saved me almost $400/year on auto insurance. YMMV, but he's always been there when
needed and has always done his best to ensure that I get value for my
premium dollar. My parents have had similar experiences with SF in
the midwest (particularly after their house caught fire when a stack pipe
for a wood stove deteriorated in the wall - SF went to the wall for them
to rebuild rapidly and with high quality construction and finishing).
Maybe I'm lucky, and not all state farm agents are so good, but I suspect
that all you hear on the internet are the bad stories, and not the far
more numerous good stories.
On 3/11/2014 2:29 AM, [email protected] wrote:
> We all want to blame the
> lawyers, but the insurance industry is equally as complicit.
The insurance companies only because they have to payout the liability
the lawyers sue for.
So yes, it is "lawyers" at the root of the problem.
--
eWoodShop: www.eWoodShop.com
Wood Shop: www.e-WoodShop.net
https://www.google.com/+eWoodShop
https://plus.google.com/+KarlCaillouet/posts
http://www.custommade.com/by/ewoodshop/
KarlCaillouet@ (the obvious)
On Tue, 11 Mar 2014 21:59:13 -0400, "Mike Marlow"
<[email protected]> wrote:
>[email protected] wrote:
>
>>
>> Yes, I had that happen once. I was paying around $300/yr for
>> insurance. They billed me $1500, even though I *had* insurance. The
>> kicker is that they were paying the premiums from escrow! That
>> mortgage company was as crooked as they come.
>
>Tell me - was it Washington Mutual?
No, it was a smaller "local" company. I don't even remember who it
was. Every six months they sent us a letter stating that our payment
was received late and they were charging us $50 plus interest. My
wife always called them the next day, from work. They always claimed
that the check didn't reach them on the "penalty" date. She
essentially called them a liar because it had cleared our bank a week
before they claimed they received it. She was looking at the account
on the computer when she called them (she worked for the bank ;-).
They would back down but how many didn't challenge them?
[email protected] wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Mar 2014 21:59:13 -0400, "Mike Marlow"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> [email protected] wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Yes, I had that happen once. I was paying around $300/yr for
>>> insurance. They billed me $1500, even though I *had* insurance.
>>> The kicker is that they were paying the premiums from escrow! That
>>> mortgage company was as crooked as they come.
>>
>> Tell me - was it Washington Mutual?
>
> No, it was a smaller "local" company. I don't even remember who it
> was. Every six months they sent us a letter stating that our payment
> was received late and they were charging us $50 plus interest. My
> wife always called them the next day, from work. They always claimed
> that the check didn't reach them on the "penalty" date. She
> essentially called them a liar because it had cleared our bank a week
> before they claimed they received it. She was looking at the account
> on the computer when she called them (she worked for the bank ;-).
> They would back down but how many didn't challenge them?
I asked because WAMU was notorious for underhanded dealings. We got stuck
with them after BOA got rid of their mortgages. It was the worst two years
(or so...) of dealing with a mortgage lender we had ever experienced. We
pre-paid principle and they mis-applied it even with the note in the lower
left corner of the check. Then they argued and refused to make adjustments.
At a point we had paid off our mortgage early but there was still this
outstanding issue of mis-applied funds so they showed us owing a great deal
yet on our mortgage. We tried every direct approach with them only to
continually be told how sorry they were and that it would be corrected - but
it wasn't. Next thing we knew we were in collections - on a mortgage that
we had paid off! Finally I involved the NYS Attorney General office. It
was a bit of work to file everything with them, but it paid off. Next thing
we knew everything was mysteriously straightened out, and we actually got a
refund. WAMU had to notify the 3 credit agencies to clear our dings and in
the end we were whole - but it was a royal pain in the ass. Dealing with a
collections department is something that will piss you off more than
anything in this newsgroup. They treat you like dung, they are rude, and
they are obnoxious. I was never so glad for anything as I was to be rid of
that bank. Not too long afterwards several states Attorney Generals offices
announced investigations into WAMU practices. Shortly after that - Wells
Fargo bought them out. Hope they didn't bring any of the people over...
--
-Mike-
[email protected]
On 3/11/2014 10:03 AM, [email protected] wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Mar 2014 09:09:12 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet>
>> SawStop seems to be a complete success story and the direction that
>> SawStop is going will lead the industry. I believe that the vast
>> majority of the people will want a saw with this technology.
>
> To me, it's common sense just like a seatbelt. A seatbelt has saved my
> life in the past. And, aside from all the rhetoric about costs,
> SawStop seems like a common sense item too.
>
It is absolutely a common sense thing. But many people let their
emotions factor in on their decisions. If you simply factor in nothing
but facts the choice become more clear. For example new car dealers
want you to take that test drive. The excitement of driving a new
vehicle helps to sell the vehicle. Now having said that we had to help
bail out GM and many people are not going to want to have any thing to
do with a company that had to be bailed out by the government. Does
this make their vehicles a bad choice? Yes if you now hate GM, "maybe
not' if you look strictly at the vehicle itself.
This whole disagreement on the SawStop is mostly based on whether you
have a dislike for the SawStop product because of it's owner or if you
simply judge the product on it's own merits. Again if you let emotion
play a part of your decision making you may not get the best deal on
paper. As with anything you buy if you are happy with your decision you
got a good deal for you. We like to buy what we like whether what we
like is a good product or not. When we put aside the good feeling and
look only at the facts we make better decisions.
Leon wrote:
>
> It is absolutely a common sense thing. But many people let their
> emotions factor in on their decisions.
Well - of course we do - we are people. If you try to deny that you don't
do the same, I'm going to have to call you on that. You may feel that you
are totally logical, but that is only based on how you, or I, or anyone else
views our own sense of logic. I will assure you - there is no such thing as
a totally logical person on the face of this earth.
> If you simply factor in
> nothing but facts
Caution Will Robinson... the word "facts" has lots of defintions, depending
on the perspective of the definer.
> the choice become more clear. For example new car
> dealers want you to take that test drive. The excitement of driving
> a new vehicle helps to sell the vehicle. Now having said that we had
> to help bail out GM and many people are not going to want to have any
> thing to do with a company that had to be bailed out by the
> government. Does this make their vehicles a bad choice? Yes if you
> now hate GM, "maybe not' if you look strictly at the vehicle itself.
Ummmmm... giving you a lot of room on this one Leon, but it really does not
make any sense. There are lots of reasons why people would never buy
another GM product again, from experiences, to dislike of the bailout, to
dislike of their continued denial of problems (like the Cavalier) that are
costing lives every year. You have painted way to broad of a brush
statement above. Just can't accept that one.
>
> This whole disagreement on the SawStop is mostly based on whether you
> have a dislike for the SawStop product because of it's owner or if you
> simply judge the product on it's own merits.
Sorry - but wrong again Leon. People have articulated other reasons that
may not seem so different from what you say above but you can't allow
yourself to lump things into categories that make sense to you. Even if
those arguments are only slightly different from what you see, they are
still different. And - those are their thoughts.
> Again if you let emotion
> play a part of your decision making you may not get the best deal on
> paper.
Oh hell Leon - be honest - we all do that. Even you - and your wife...
> As with anything you buy if you are happy with your decision
> you got a good deal for you.
Agreed!
> We like to buy what we like whether
> what we like is a good product or not. When we put aside the good
> feeling and look only at the facts we make better decisions.
There is that word "facts" again. Facts are only facts in the eye of those
who believe in those "facts".
--
-Mike-
[email protected]
Leon wrote:
>
> Ok that's it! When you do finally get clearance to visit you get the
> "BED OF NAILS" ;~)
:-)
(and I never use emoticons...)
--
-Mike-
[email protected]
On 3/11/2014 5:59 AM, Swingman wrote:
> On 3/11/2014 2:29 AM, [email protected] wrote:
>> We all want to blame the
>> lawyers, but the insurance industry is equally as complicit.
>
> The insurance companies only because they have to payout the liability
> the lawyers sue for.
>
Agreed, I don't think an insurance company can dictate what brand
products you sell or use. Their pricing to insure you might do that
however.
> So yes, it is "lawyers" at the root of the problem.
>
Precicely
On Tue, 11 Mar 2014 15:05:33 -0400, "Mike Marlow"
<[email protected]> wrote:
>[email protected] wrote:
>> On Tue, 11 Mar 2014 14:10:38 -0400, "Mike Marlow"
>>> This whole conversation is getting way out of hand. Yes - Leon is
>>> right in some respects, but not in total. Banks do not unilaterly
>>> just purchase insurance that they think you need or even that
>>> insurance companys are pushing. It really pays to talk to people
>>> who really know and not pay any attention to internet newsgroup
>>> advice.
>>
>> A little off topic, but I think that might depend on what the
>> insurance is for and the value of what you're insuring. For a home
>> mortgage as an example, I believe that unless your down payment is a
>> certain percentage, you have to have insurance on your mortgage.
>>
>
>Down here Dave, if you have a mortgage, you have to maintain insurance.
You have to maintain insurance to cover casualty losses (not contents
or liability) for at least the amount of the mortgage. That's not
law, though, rather a normal part of the mortgage contract.
>That said - that statement has nothing at all to do with the discussion at
>hand.
On Mon, 10 Mar 2014 20:48:55 -0400, Ed Pawlowski <[email protected]> wrote:
>On 3/10/2014 8:36 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>> On Sun, 9 Mar 2014 17:31:51 -0700, "Lew Hodgett"
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> RE: Subject
>>>
>>> As soon as the insurance companies determine that customers who
>>> use a SawStop tablesaw have lower injury payouts, this discussion
>>> will be moot.
>>>
>> Oh, good grief!
>>
>
>Our workman's comp carrier is recommending SawStop and may require them
>in the future
Understandable for a shop. Not so much so for personal insurance
types. If I owned a shop, particularly where others were using the
tools, I'd have one, too.
On Tue, 11 Mar 2014 09:09:12 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet>
>SawStop seems to be a complete success story and the direction that
>SawStop is going will lead the industry. I believe that the vast
>majority of the people will want a saw with this technology.
To me, it's common sense just like a seatbelt. A seatbelt has saved my
life in the past. And, aside from all the rhetoric about costs,
SawStop seems like a common sense item too.
On 3/9/2014 10:35 AM, [email protected] wrote:
> There is no such thing as "safe". The only question is how much are
> you willing to pay for each bit of "safety".
Especially when paying in freedoms:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=phBEhZK5pvY
--
eWoodShop: www.eWoodShop.com
Wood Shop: www.e-WoodShop.net
https://www.google.com/+eWoodShop
https://plus.google.com/+KarlCaillouet/posts
http://www.custommade.com/by/ewoodshop/
KarlCaillouet@ (the obvious)
On 3/5/2014 9:31 PM, Larry Blanchard wrote:
> On Wed, 05 Mar 2014 19:55:51 -0600, Leon wrote:
>
>
> "allows you to be more of an idiot."
>
> "someone becomes more of an idiot"
>
> Last time I looked "allows" and "becomes" were not synonyms.
>
> And if you don't think that a belief that an activity cannot hurt one
> allows one to become more careless, I suggest you ask any psychologist.
>
> Yes, the Sawstop is a good saw. Yes, it is the safest saw on the
> market. No, it is not a revealed truth from Heaven :-).
>
> You call the OP an idiot. Woodchucker calls him a troll. Seems a bit
> harsh for what to me is a defensible point of view.
>
> That psychologist can also acquaint you with the proclivity of someone
> who owns a product to get defensive when the product is criticized. The
> more expensive the product, the more defensive :-).
>
No Larry, I called him a TROLL because he is. He is an old time guy that
likes stirring the pot and calling people names..
He just started mildly, I remember his name from long ago, could have
been the binaries, but his name was very familiar.
--
Jeff
On 3/8/2014 10:14 PM, Elrond Hubbard wrote:
> Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet> wrote in
> news:[email protected]:
>
>>>>> This comment will undoubtedly loose the usual shitstorm of debate
>>>>> on a subject that has already been flogged to death. I am strongly
>>>>> of the opinion that having a saw with an idiot-proof feature allows
>>>>> you to be more of an idiot.
>>>>>
>>>> Said by the idiot. I am as entitled to voice my opinion as any one
>>>> here but insinuating that someone becomes more of an idiot because
>>>> his or her beliefs don't align with yours speaks volumes about you.
>>>>
>>>> If you can afford the saw it is a no brainier.
>>>
>>> Didn't call anyone an idiot, nor did I suggest that you weren't
>>> entitled to the opinion which you have expressed at least ten
>>> thousand times on this forum. Why so defensive?
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Let me quote you here.
>>
>> I am strongly of the opinion that having a saw with an
>> idiot-proof
>> feature allows you to be more of an idiot.
>>
>> To be able to be more of an idiot you first have to be an idiot. If
>> you are not an idiot at all you cannot be more of one.
>
>
> We're all idiots to some degree, Leon. For instance, some people can't
> tell the difference between a huge generalization and a personal attack.
>
>
>> So while you did not directly name names you did indicate that "having
>> a saw with an idiot-proof feature" allows a you to be more of an
>> idiot.
>>
>> You accomplished what you set out to do, offend any one recommending,
>> considering, or using a SawStop.
>
>
> All I set out to do was offer my opinion. You disagree with my opinion.
> And you go on to make your argument for the ten-thousand and one-th
> time.
>
>
>> Further you stated,
>>
>> For the last ten years I've used a table saw daily, and for
>> thirty
>> or so years prior to that, I'd used one at least a few of times a
>> week. A fewyouthful misadventures with kickback taught me respect. I'm
>> not foolhardy enough to say I can't get hurt again, but if I do, it
>> won't be because I have a false sense of security from having a saw
>> that makes a workshop safe for hot dogs.
>>
>>
>> Now certainly you understand that with all of your claimed vast years
>> of extensive and continuous use of a TS that a beginner or a person
>> clearly not as smart as you might benefit from a safer saw, one that
>> can prevent a serious cut should that person with much much much less
>> experience than you have a slip in judgement or do something foolish.
>
> Which is why all entry-level table saws are equipped with the Saw Stop,
> right? Because all first-time buyers are willing and able to shell out
> the extra $$$ that the hot-dog nicking safety device costs.
>
> No?
>
> Please elaborate.
>
>
>> You admit that with your youthful adventures with kickback, and since
>> you mentioned adventures as plural, one would deduct that either you
>> are a slow learner or that there actually are numerous possibilities
>> of being hurt on a TS. AAMOF there is not a publication that can
>> cover every possible instance of what can prevent an accident. Only
>> experience helps to fill in the gaps.
>>
>> And to sum up your way of thinking, If you get hurt using a TS, that
>> is less safe to use, it is your own fault.
>
>
>
> Absolutely. Personal responsibility is a wonderful thing. Can't
> recommend it enough. Should be taught in school, even.
>
>
>
>> Never mind the fact that
>> if you were using a safer saw you might not get hurt. Have you ever
>> considered that if you cut you finger or hand it is your fault because
>> you were not using a SawStop?
>
>
>
> Huh??? Of course it would be my fault. See above re: personal
> responsibility.
>
>
>
>> And with your comment below, you clearly have not thought out what
>> your words really mean.
>>
>> I'm not foolhardy enough to say I can't get hurt again, but if I
>> do, it won't be because I have a false sense of security from having a
>> saw that makes a workshop safe for hot dogs.
>>
>>
>> If you do get hurt again, it will absolutely be because you have a
>> false sense of security. I'm not calling you stupid but do you think
>> that you would actually do something purposely wrong? If you get hurt
>> again is will because you either purposely did something wrong or
>> because you do not have enough knowledge/experience to know that the
>> operation you are performing can harm you. Believe me, if you think
>> that you know all of the ways to prevent being harmed on the TS you
>> are the prime target of SawStop. If you know you don't know every way
>> of being harmed on a TS you are also a prime target of SawStop.
>
>
> As I said earlier, I'm not enough of a fool to think that I can't get
> hurt by a table saw. I remind myself EVERY TIME I turn the thing on. I'm
> also not enough of a fool to think that the overpriced safety device you
> defend so rabidly will prevent anything other than the type of accident
> caused by carelessness, and is not designed to prevent any of the other
> kinds of harm the thing can throw my way if I use it incorrectly.
>
>
So looking back I did not see a previous post from Elron Hubbard, so who
did you post your opinion as???
--
Jeff
On 3/9/2014 11:13 AM, Swingman wrote:
> On 3/9/2014 10:35 AM, [email protected] wrote:
>
>> There is no such thing as "safe". The only question is how much are
>> you willing to pay for each bit of "safety".
>
> Especially when paying in freedoms:
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=phBEhZK5pvY
>
>
Buying yourself a gun for protection against the possibility of being
attacked or robbed is costly. But NOT nearly as costly as losing your
right to own that type of protection.
Out lawing guns will only take protection away from the law biding
citizens. Criminals, the people we need guns to protect ourselves from,
will be the only ones that will still have guns if we lose our rights to
own guns.
Some people know karate and don't need guns to begin with. These people
know that the gun manufacturers are only out to make guns for profit and
really don't care about your safety.
On 3/5/2014 10:18 PM, Lew Hodgett wrote:
> Leon wrote:
>
>> On my Win 7 PC using Chrome, my iPad, iPhone using Safari simply
>> typing
>> SawStop.com and pressing enter I get what I expect, the SawStop web
>> site.
>> You don't?
> --------------------------------
> Yes but that is 11 keystrokes, not 8.
>
> Lew
>
>
>
>
Ok, and the devil made you do it, ;~) I'm going to point out what I was
referring too. ;)
Both your and my URLs get you there in one click.
I was referring to the length of the "tiny URL" vs the length of the URL
that gets you directly to SawStop.
Now I will add that I should have added the www. to sawstop.com. ;~)
www.sawstop.com
Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet> wrote in
news:[email protected]:
> Now something you should be considering. You obviously are serious
> about this hobby and plan to continue woodworking since this is going
> to be a replacement saw. Don't ask yourself if you can afford the
> SawStop, ask yourself if you can afford to loose a finger or the
> expense of the ER.
>
> There are other fine offerings but so far none have your back should
> you, when you , make that mistake, have a lapse in judgement, or do
> something stupid.
>
> The first time the saw saves your butt is when the saw more than pays
> for it self.
This comment will undoubtedly loose the usual shitstorm of debate on a
subject that has already been flogged to death. I am strongly of the
opinion that having a saw with an idiot-proof feature allows you to be more
of an idiot.
Bank the $1000, and never use your saw without reminding yourself that it
is capable of causing you grievous bodily harm. Not everyone who uses a
table saw will lose a finger. But any woodworker who fails to be vigilant
might.
The real question: Right-tilt or left?
On Sun, 09 Mar 2014 18:09:31 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet>
wrote:
>On 3/9/2014 5:22 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>> On Sun, 09 Mar 2014 13:14:50 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 3/9/2014 10:35 AM, [email protected] wrote:
>>>> On Sun, 09 Mar 2014 11:19:11 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Sun, 09 Mar 2014 11:06:49 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>>>>>> Not like everything else. The difference is the cost (and the
>>>>>> patents). Let's do this again after the patents run out.
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm wondering how many less than ten fingered woodworking people would
>>>>> agree with you?
>>>>
>>>> Completely irrelevant. A similar silly-statement would be "How many
>>>> people who had limbs lost in car accidents, prefer they stayed home
>>>> that day?". Life *is* about risk/reward, no matter how much the
>>>> nanny-state tries to tell you otherwise.
>>>>
>>>> There is no such thing as "safe". The only question is how much are
>>>> you willing to pay for each bit of "safety". When I bought my saw, I
>>>> looked at a SawStop but decided that the Unisaw would look nice in the
>>>> garage (nicer than the Griz). A picture of a SawStop just wouldn't
>>>> cut it.
>>>>
>>>> Do you have a SawStop?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> FWIW I had the same attitude and comments here as those that have not
>>> yet benefited from the SawStop or see the benefit of spending and extra
>>> thousand on a saw, 25 years ago.
>>
>> Completely irrelevant. Just because you bought into SawStop after 25
>> years, doesn't mean it's the right choice for everyone else. Saying
>> so is pure, unadulterated, snobbery.
>
>No,no,no, I am not saying that every one should buy the SawStop so much
>as I have a perspective from both sides and in my instance it was the
>right choice for me.
I misread what you said. It sometimes reads like you are making that
case and at other times not. I apologize if I'm putting words in your
mouth.
>As far as those that have not benefited, I am
>referring to those that have used a SawStop and caused it to lock up the
>blade to prevent a cut. I do believe that if you were to use one and
>actually have an accident that causes the brake to engage and you don't
>end up at the ER you probably would agree that the SawStop is really
>worth a bit more consideration.
If. If. If. But you're right. When I had an asshole (switched
plates, no insurance, no DL, on parole from State Penn, etc.) run a
stop sign and T-Bone me, I wished I'd stayed in bed that day. However,
life is dangerous and that day paid the same as the other 10,000 days
I've driven to work.
>>> You cut your self it is your own damn fault and you did something wrong.
>>> I'll be careful and practice every rule that I have read or have been
>>> taught.
>>
>> Of course.
>>
>>> Then one day I cut half my thumb off, about 15 years later SawStop is on
>>> the horizon. Today I own a SawStop. Wow what did I do wrong???
>>> Hummmmmm obviously I did something wrong... and it took me about one
>>> year to almost cut my thumb off again before I realized what had
>>> actually happened. No set of safety rules "directly" addressed what
>>> went wrong. I can assure you that safety rules only cover the basics
>>> and it is not unusual to be in a situation that is not specifically
>>> addressed in the "rules".
>>
>> No set of "rules" keeps killers from killing, either. They do help (a
>> lot). Not all accidents are handled by SawStop, either. Dangerous
>> tools require care.
>
>Exactly however the SawStop does help to prevent severing a body part.
>
>>
>>> Unfortunately one never really understands every conceivable way that
>>> you can be injured by the TS, that is until you have an unfortunate
>>> accident, IF you have an accident. No one ever tries to have an
>>> accident but no one lives a charmed life, one with out accidents.
>>
>> Irrelevant. Thousands of people never do have such an accident.
>
>I am talking any kind of accident, tripping and falling, paper cut, etc.
> We all know exactly how to prevent any of these accidents but they
>still happen. We become complacent or something out of our control
>happens. The same can happen with the TS.
Where is your RouterStop? ...or BandStop? ...or Heavens help us all,
JointerStop? Yes, that's my point. Life *is* dangerous. That's no
reason to be afraid or to spend lots of money in one small area of
life to make it "safe" at the expense of everything else.
>>> It is all a matter of choice of how safe you want your equipment to be
>>> and how much you value your safety.
>>
>> ...and choices you have. If I had a couple of extra thousand dollars,
>> at the time, I *might* have chosen SawStop, too. ...or a bandsaw. 'or
>> a Festool. ;-)
>>
>>> All things considered, and knowing what I do about why accidents are
>>> called accidents, I choose my safety over principal.
>>
>> SawStop only "fixes" one of the very many accidents that are lurking
>> for all of us. If I used my tools as a business, my choices would be
>> very different.
>
>This is very true.
>
>
>>
>>> So for anyone that has not yet been convinced that a SawStop is a smart
>>> investment or an investment worth saving up for, I totally understand, I
>>> have been in your shoes.
>>
>> That's really my point. Choice is good. In a decade, when the Gass
>> patents run out, I may trade.
>
>So because you mentioned Gass is this more of an emotional decision
>given many don't care for the way he operates? Or do you honestly
>believe that with patent depletion that competition will drive the
>prices down? Have you considered what inflation will do to the pricing?
Both, to be honest. I was trying to keep Gass' crony capitalism
attempts out of this discussion. Competition *will* drive the SawStop
*function* prices down as soon as the patents expire. Competition is
good.
>For example and these are just close comparisons, about 10-12 years ago
>the PM2000 with 50" fence and 3hp motor was approximately $2000. Today
>Woodcraft offers it for $3364 before the current 15% sale discount.
>in 2000 a similar Jet was $1300 today, $2449 before the 15% sale
>discount. You can probably expect for prices to do the same in the
>next 10 years and that is going to put those particular TS's in excess
>of the price of an industrial SawStop today, $3999. For a more
>comparable Professional SawStop, $2999. today. And yes, the SawStop
>does compare in quality to the saws mentioned. It is not a budget built
>machine.
Understood. I don't own a PM'anything. I once was about to buy one
of their drill presses but the price jumped rather big-time, just
about when the Delta 18-900L came out. I liked it a lot better, for
what the PM cost before the bump. The point is that you're comparing
it to the most expensive, not the "best values".
>Just something to consider. Certainly the SawStop will be more
>expensive later on too but there is no guarantee that the competition
>will offer some type of similar safety feature then either, should you
>find that you want a saw with that feature. Something to remember, all
>of those competitors had the opportunity to have the SawStop technology
>before SawStop considered building their own saw to compete. They did
>not want it then, they may not want it later. Anyway none of the above
>is certain to happen but by the same token is not a stretch of the
>imagination either.
They didn't want to pay Gass' asking price (not just the $$).
>And if yu simply don't want to send any pennies Gass's way that is OK
>too. ;~)
I don't but not because of the technology. If it were a technology
issue, I'd want to see him as rich as Gates. I *like* to see rich
people. I don't like to see some people get rich, though. ;-)
>
>
>
>
On Sun, 09 Mar 2014 20:38:31 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>On Sun, 09 Mar 2014 18:22:05 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>>That's really my point. Choice is good. In a decade, when the Gass
>>patents run out, I may trade.
>
> So there it is. You're openly admitting that SawStop type technology
>has value. That's really all I was looking for you to say.
Hey, dumbshit, if you could read beyond "See Dick and Jane", that's
always been my point.
>Question is, would you still consider buying a SawStop type competitor
>saw if prices for the clone technology were almost the same as SawStop
>is now?
No. As usual, you're incapable of reading what is written quite
clearly. Take a remedial reading course.
>Table saw manufacturers are in the business to make money. For all
>your whining about outlandish costs, what makes you think that prices
>will come down much when the patents expire?
You really are a dumbass (emphasis on the "ass"). Yes, I think
competition is a good thing. For *all* of us.
>In the end, you're damned if you're going to be forced into anything,
>even if it's good for you. Obviously, that's the point you've been
>trying to make all along.
No, you're too fucking STUPID to understand what I've been saying. Try
reading what's written, for once, instead of making up lies about
others to suit your inflated self worth.
On 3/9/2014 6:43 PM, [email protected] wrote:
> On Sun, 09 Mar 2014 18:09:31 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet>
Snip
>>
>> No,no,no, I am not saying that every one should buy the SawStop so much
>> as I have a perspective from both sides and in my instance it was the
>> right choice for me.
>
> I misread what you said. It sometimes reads like you are making that
> case and at other times not. I apologize if I'm putting words in your
> mouth.
No apology necessary. I don't claim to be perfectly clear. ;~)
>
>> As far as those that have not benefited, I am
>> referring to those that have used a SawStop and caused it to lock up the
>> blade to prevent a cut. I do believe that if you were to use one and
>> actually have an accident that causes the brake to engage and you don't
>> end up at the ER you probably would agree that the SawStop is really
>> worth a bit more consideration.
>
> If. If. If. But you're right. When I had an asshole (switched
> plates, no insurance, no DL, on parole from State Penn, etc.) run a
> stop sign and T-Bone me, I wished I'd stayed in bed that day. However,
> life is dangerous and that day paid the same as the other 10,000 days
> I've driven to work.
YES lots of If's in there... Same reason we chose to have health
insurance or not, once upon a time.
>
>>>> You cut your self it is your own damn fault and you did something wrong.
>>>> I'll be careful and practice every rule that I have read or have been
>>>> taught.
>>>
>>> Of course.
>>>
>>>> Then one day I cut half my thumb off, about 15 years later SawStop is on
>>>> the horizon. Today I own a SawStop. Wow what did I do wrong???
>>>> Hummmmmm obviously I did something wrong... and it took me about one
>>>> year to almost cut my thumb off again before I realized what had
>>>> actually happened. No set of safety rules "directly" addressed what
>>>> went wrong. I can assure you that safety rules only cover the basics
>>>> and it is not unusual to be in a situation that is not specifically
>>>> addressed in the "rules".
>>>
>>> No set of "rules" keeps killers from killing, either. They do help (a
>>> lot). Not all accidents are handled by SawStop, either. Dangerous
>>> tools require care.
>>
>> Exactly however the SawStop does help to prevent severing a body part.
>>
>>>
>>>> Unfortunately one never really understands every conceivable way that
>>>> you can be injured by the TS, that is until you have an unfortunate
>>>> accident, IF you have an accident. No one ever tries to have an
>>>> accident but no one lives a charmed life, one with out accidents.
>>>
>>> Irrelevant. Thousands of people never do have such an accident.
>>
>> I am talking any kind of accident, tripping and falling, paper cut, etc.
>> We all know exactly how to prevent any of these accidents but they
>> still happen. We become complacent or something out of our control
>> happens. The same can happen with the TS.
>
> Where is your RouterStop? ...or BandStop? ...or Heavens help us all,
> JointerStop? Yes, that's my point. Life *is* dangerous. That's no
> reason to be afraid or to spend lots of money in one small area of
> life to make it "safe" at the expense of everything else.
Yeah but in many cases there are more obvious dangers and we try to
guard against them. Nothing has really changed, there are safe guards
everywhere and the vast majority are good things on their own merrit
despite the fact that the government mandated them and cause all of us
to pay way too much.
>
>>>> It is all a matter of choice of how safe you want your equipment to be
>>>> and how much you value your safety.
>>>
>>> ...and choices you have. If I had a couple of extra thousand dollars,
>>> at the time, I *might* have chosen SawStop, too. ...or a bandsaw. 'or
>>> a Festool. ;-)
>>>
>>>> All things considered, and knowing what I do about why accidents are
>>>> called accidents, I choose my safety over principal.
>>>
>>> SawStop only "fixes" one of the very many accidents that are lurking
>>> for all of us. If I used my tools as a business, my choices would be
>>> very different.
>>
>> This is very true.
>>
>>
>>>
>>>> So for anyone that has not yet been convinced that a SawStop is a smart
>>>> investment or an investment worth saving up for, I totally understand, I
>>>> have been in your shoes.
>>>
>>> That's really my point. Choice is good. In a decade, when the Gass
>>> patents run out, I may trade.
>>
>> So because you mentioned Gass is this more of an emotional decision
>> given many don't care for the way he operates? Or do you honestly
>> believe that with patent depletion that competition will drive the
>> prices down? Have you considered what inflation will do to the pricing?
>
> Both, to be honest. I was trying to keep Gass' crony capitalism
> attempts out of this discussion. Competition *will* drive the SawStop
> *function* prices down as soon as the patents expire. Competition is
> good.
Well I commend you for admitting to both. You have now presented a
valid reason for the way you think about the SS. And yes competition is
good for all.
>
>> For example and these are just close comparisons, about 10-12 years ago
>> the PM2000 with 50" fence and 3hp motor was approximately $2000. Today
>> Woodcraft offers it for $3364 before the current 15% sale discount.
>> in 2000 a similar Jet was $1300 today, $2449 before the 15% sale
>> discount. You can probably expect for prices to do the same in the
>> next 10 years and that is going to put those particular TS's in excess
>> of the price of an industrial SawStop today, $3999. For a more
>> comparable Professional SawStop, $2999. today. And yes, the SawStop
>> does compare in quality to the saws mentioned. It is not a budget built
>> machine.
>
> Understood. I don't own a PM'anything. I once was about to buy one
> of their drill presses but the price jumped rather big-time, just
> about when the Delta 18-900L came out. I liked it a lot better, for
> what the PM cost before the bump. The point is that you're comparing
> it to the most expensive, not the "best values".
Sorry on the comparison, I was shooting for the best comparison of like
build quality, fit, finish, features. etc.... For simply cutting a
board there is not bottom limit for what will suffice.
>
>> Just something to consider. Certainly the SawStop will be more
>> expensive later on too but there is no guarantee that the competition
>> will offer some type of similar safety feature then either, should you
>> find that you want a saw with that feature. Something to remember, all
>> of those competitors had the opportunity to have the SawStop technology
>> before SawStop considered building their own saw to compete. They did
>> not want it then, they may not want it later. Anyway none of the above
>> is certain to happen but by the same token is not a stretch of the
>> imagination either.
>
> They didn't want to pay Gass' asking price (not just the $$).
Understood but you never know what the actual price and or concessions
will be until after the contract is agreed upon by both parties.
>
>> And if yu simply don't want to send any pennies Gass's way that is OK
>> too. ;~)
>
> I don't but not because of the technology. If it were a technology
> issue, I'd want to see him as rich as Gates. I *like* to see rich
> people. I don't like to see some people get rich, though. ;-)
;~) Understood.
On Sun, 09 Mar 2014 12:28:35 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>On Sun, 09 Mar 2014 12:17:34 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>>>I don't even have a workshop. All of my woodworking is limited to the
>>>workbench in my living room. But, if I did have a workshop, I'd
>>>seriously consider a SawStop or a sliding table panel saw. That being
>>>said, my needs are different than the average woodworker.
>
>>So you admit that it's not all that cut-and-dried; there *is* a
>>decision to be made.
>
>There's always a decision to be made. And, you've chosen to ignore my
>statement that my situation when using a tablesaw is different than
>most.
Since you've not made that decision and have just admitted that
perhaps it's not "stupid" to buy a non-stop saw, you really have no
argument.
> I do however question your comparison ridiculous comparisons as to
>costs.
Fact, Jack. That's *exactly* the decision I was confronted with.
$1600 for the Unisaw - $3500 for the "equivalent" SawStop. The $1600
was do-able (up from the $1400 for the budgeted Griz). $3500 would
have had me laughed out of the "capital acquisition" meeting.
>> Sure, but not if I had to pay twice as much for the car with one.
>>Yes. No. Neither, if I had to pay twice as much for the house.
>
>The SawStop mechanism DOES NOT double the price of the saw. It doesn't
>even come close. The SawStop tablesaw itself is a well made, very
>decent operating tablesaw with top notch fit and finish.
It *DID*. That's the point.
>There's a number of regular $3000 tablesaws on the market and the
>SawStop is as good if not better than all of them.
Oh, good grief! When *you* make the decision with *your* money, come
back and we'll talk.
On Tue, 11 Mar 2014 03:25:02 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>On Mon, 10 Mar 2014 20:36:41 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>>The cost was obviously more than the makers thought it was worth. The
>>numbers thrown around were way out of line.
>
>In your opinion which is almost always crap;
You really have to prove that you're an asshole every day, don't you?
>>The proof is in the (empty bowl of) pudding.
>>Gass' power play with the FTC tells a lot.
>
>As usual, your emotions and your senility rule you.
You're full of shit, as usual.
On Tue, 11 Mar 2014 08:51:07 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet>
wrote:
>On 3/10/2014 7:36 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>> On Sun, 09 Mar 2014 19:11:06 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 3/9/2014 6:23 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>>>> On Sun, 09 Mar 2014 18:15:05 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 3/9/2014 5:05 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>>>>>> On Sun, 09 Mar 2014 13:31:05 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 3/9/2014 12:18 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Sun, 09 Mar 2014 13:03:10 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 09 Mar 2014 12:42:21 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Fact, Jack. That's *exactly* the decision I was confronted with.
>>>>>>>>>> $1600 for the Unisaw - $3500 for the "equivalent" SawStop. The $1600
>>>>>>>>>> was do-able (up from the $1400 for the budgeted Griz). $3500 would
>>>>>>>>>> have had me laughed out of the "capital acquisition" meeting.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> As usual, your fact are full of holes.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Now you're calling me a liar. Figures.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Powermatic PM2000 ~ $3000
>>>>>>>>> Delta 36-L352 ~ $3000
>>>>>>>>> SawStop Professional cabinet saw ~ $3000
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> http://www.consumersearch.com/table-saw-reviews/cabinet-saws
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I'm telling you WHAT MY DECISION WAS. GOT IT?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The REAL TRUTH is that MOST SawStop naysayers like you are too busy
>>>>>>>>> letting your emotions overrule your common sense. You hate GASS'
>>>>>>>>> business tactics so much that you'll consider any excuse to exclude a
>>>>>>>>> SawStop from your purchasing condition.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Bullshit. Like most suck-ups, you're talking out both sides of your
>>>>>>>> mouth. You admit that price is an issue and that there is a decision
>>>>>>>> to be made, yet you denigrate those who don't agree with a choice
>>>>>>>> you've NEVER MADE and probably never will.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I don't care that some love SawStop. Sobeit. Their decision.
>>>>>>>> However, when some know-nothing jumps into the fray, talking out both
>>>>>>>> sided of his mouth, it's really funny.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It does speak volumes to actually have stepped up and bought the saw. I
>>>>>>> did.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yes, it means you weighed the choices and decided that it was worth
>>>>>> it. I'm perfectly fine with that, as long as that choice exists.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Every one is entitled to their opinion with out being attacked and or
>>>>>>> being compared to an idiot or the possibility of being more of an idiot.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Well, that's really at the bottom of my point. Choice is a good
>>>>>> thing.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Experience trumps, "what he said" or going with the popular consensus,
>>>>>>> every time.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> AGW is pretty popular but it doesn't make it right. Socialism is
>>>>>> pretty popular, right now, too.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I think where you and I may be at odds on this discussion is that you
>>>>> might think that "I" think the SawStop should be in every ones shop. I
>>>>> don't believe that to the extent that everyone must have one in their
>>>>> shop.
>>>>
>>>> You've certainly made that implication, in the past and really are
>>>> quite close to it in this.
>>>
>>> Well way way back when I thought it was a good enough idea to make
>>> mandatory. I have changed my mind on that given the implications that if
>>> you give them an inch they will take a mile.
>>
>> There is lots not to like about the nanny state.
>
>Yes there are LOT"S not to like. Given that, there is a thing or two
>that is of benefit to some one.
The one that bought the congresscritter, perhaps. Liberty is better
for everyone else, though.
>>
>>> I never liked the method
>>> of the product being marketed after being turned down by the other
>>> builders.
>>
>> Not sure I follow this sentence.
>
>Gass lobbied to have his technology mandated after being turned down and
>or the deals fell through prior to him actually manufacturing the
>product himself.
Thanks. I took it to mean that you didn't like his marketing (making)
the saw himself, after he couldn't find anyone else to license his
patent. I didn't make any sense. ;-)
>And on another note it could be assumed that given the methods he used
>to bring the product to market and the fact that he is a patent attorney
>might dictate that his product be damn well effective and no cost
>cutting measures be used if there is possibility of those measures
>affecting the performance of the saw. Imagine the vengeance that would
>be directed toward him or his company should there be and injury and any
>proof of tampering or change of design to save production costs.
>
Sure. I don't take anything away from him for the technology/patent,
just his tactics.
>
>>> But I am quite flexible in my thinking. If you can show me
>>> valid reasoning I will consider it but I prefer to leave the emotional
>>> side of reasoning to my wife, and she would whole heartily agree.
>>>
>> "Cost vs. benefit" is emotional?
>
>In my case more of a deduction. Given my previous profession and
>decision making on a daily basis there was not time for emotion. I
>still think this way, for the most part, and probably why I have a bit
>of a different attitude towards the SawStop political side.
>
OK? I came to the opposite conclusion. Same facts + different
weighting = different answer. That's "emotional" and yours wasn't?
>
>>>>
>>>>> I think it would be good if the competition would have partnered
>>>>> with SawStop to begin with and then every one could have had the choice
>>>>> of having the technology "or not" in the brands of their choice.
>>>>
>>>> Gass had no intention of making it available with "reasonable and
>>>> non-discriminatory" conditions.
>
>That would be an assumption but not a fact. Because no contracts are in
>effect no one knows what might have been. Believing/thinking that he
>had no intention of being flexible during a real negotiation would be
>like a similar assumption that the company that he actually did have a
>deal with was strong armed by the other manufacturers to not go through
>with the agreement. A reasonable assumption but only an assumption.
My conclusion from the writings at the time. It's the best
information we'll ever have.
>>>
>>> Well that is here say. Since no actual contracts were negotiated no one
>>> really knows what the contracts would have said. Naturally a
>>> manufacturer will ask the highest price that they think they can get.
>>
>> The cost was obviously more than the makers thought it was worth. The
>> numbers thrown around were way out of line.
>
>I do believe that cost was the prime factor. BUT not necessarily only
>the cost of paying Gass.
Disagree, well, after what it would take to actually produce and
market the saw with the brake.
>There are many many other costs that could
>have and probably were factored in. What would the cost be for
>additional product liability for something that they had not developed
>themselves. What would be the cost of having double inventory and
>manufacturing capability for the saws with and with out technology.
Sure, those are costs but I don't think they're on the same order of
magnitude. Did the survivors of seat belt accident victims sue Ford
and GM after seat belts were installed? "Best practices" and all
that.
>What would tooling cost to reinvent their product to be compatible with
>the technology. There are countless down the road expenses that come
>into play other than simply the cost of to use the technology. Changing
>your product is quite expensive in itself. You really don't see many
>changes in these type products through out the life of the basic design.
> The Unisaw saw is quite old and kept it's basic design for many many
>years. Only recently did Delta change that design drastically and it
>appears that the new design is not on every ones wish list. Sales of
>the old Unisaw design were probably better than the new Unisaw design.
About the same time as the SawStop patents (2002). I'd love the new
design but, like the SawStop, it's well beyond what I was willing to
pay. There is no way it's worth 2x the old design.
>>> And one of the manufacturers did agree to the some kind of terms but
>>> something, and no one knows what that some thing was, did cause the deal
>>> to fall through the cracks.
>>
>> The proof is in the (empty bowl of) pudding.
>
>Well there is no proof actually. That would be another assumption. Do
>you know exactly why the deal fell through? Have you seen the written
>reason that the company used to withdraw from the agreement?
>
It didn't happen. If it would make them money, do you think they'd
refuse? A former boss taught me the meaning of the "existence
theorem", long ago. ;-)
>>
>>> I highly suspect there was some agreement,
>>> by those that were approached, to not accept the offers and force this
>>> new guy out. Little did any of them know just how successful Gass would
>>> be in producing his own product and is also suspect they are all
>>> probably rethinking the opportunity missed.
>>> In a nut shell no one knows what any of the negotiated deals would have
>>> been.
>>>
>> Gass' power play with the FTC tells a lot.
>
>Yes it does seem to look that way. And my thoughts just above, about
>why the deal/deals fell through, are just an assumption.
>
>
>
>>>>
>>>>> I prefer to leave the political aspect out of the discussion.
>>>>
>>>> Impossible. It is at its heart a political discussion.
>>>
>>> Perhaps impossible for you but I have no problem with simply looking at
>>> the product. Now if you really want to get pissed off lets consider the
>>> fact that we no longer have a choice of buying health care or not. At
>>> least with the SawStop the intentions were not to mandate that every
>>> citizen of the US be required to buy a SawStop even if they did not ever
>>> have any intention of buying any woodworking equipment what so ever.
>>>
>> I don't see a lot of difference. Show me where either is in the
>> Constitution as an "enumerated power".
>
>Not sure I follow, could you be more explicit?
>
Where does the Constitution explicitly allow federal government
control of my safety? Are soda drinks next?
woodchucker <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:
>> Bank the $1000, and never use your saw without reminding yourself
>> that it is capable of causing you grievous bodily harm. Not everyone
>> who uses a table saw will lose a finger. But any woodworker who fails
>> to be vigilant might.
>>
>> The real question: Right-tilt or left?
>>
>
> The TROLL is back..
> Tyrone, for you the question is whether you will cut your right or
> left hand off.
For the last ten years I've used a table saw daily, and for thirty or so
years prior to that, I'd used one at least a few of times a week. A few
youthful misadventures with kickback taught me respect. I'm not foolhardy
enough to say I can't get hurt again, but if I do, it won't be because I
have a false sense of security from having a saw that makes a workshop safe
for hot dogs.
On 3/9/2014 12:18 PM, [email protected] wrote:
> On Sun, 09 Mar 2014 13:03:10 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 09 Mar 2014 12:42:21 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>>> Fact, Jack. That's *exactly* the decision I was confronted with.
>>> $1600 for the Unisaw - $3500 for the "equivalent" SawStop. The $1600
>>> was do-able (up from the $1400 for the budgeted Griz). $3500 would
>>> have had me laughed out of the "capital acquisition" meeting.
>>
>> As usual, your fact are full of holes.
>
> Now you're calling me a liar. Figures.
>
>> Powermatic PM2000 ~ $3000
>> Delta 36-L352 ~ $3000
>> SawStop Professional cabinet saw ~ $3000
>>
>> http://www.consumersearch.com/table-saw-reviews/cabinet-saws
>
> I'm telling you WHAT MY DECISION WAS. GOT IT?
>
>> The REAL TRUTH is that MOST SawStop naysayers like you are too busy
>> letting your emotions overrule your common sense. You hate GASS'
>> business tactics so much that you'll consider any excuse to exclude a
>> SawStop from your purchasing condition.
>
> Bullshit. Like most suck-ups, you're talking out both sides of your
> mouth. You admit that price is an issue and that there is a decision
> to be made, yet you denigrate those who don't agree with a choice
> you've NEVER MADE and probably never will.
>
> I don't care that some love SawStop. Sobeit. Their decision.
> However, when some know-nothing jumps into the fray, talking out both
> sided of his mouth, it's really funny.
>
It does speak volumes to actually have stepped up and bought the saw. I
did.
Every one is entitled to their opinion with out being attacked and or
being compared to an idiot or the possibility of being more of an idiot.
Experience trumps, "what he said" or going with the popular consensus,
every time.
On Tue, 11 Mar 2014 12:06:28 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet>
wrote:
>
>This whole disagreement on the SawStop is mostly based on whether you
>have a dislike for the SawStop product because of it's owner or if you
>simply judge the product on it's own merits. Again if you let emotion
>play a part of your decision making you may not get the best deal on
>paper. As with anything you buy if you are happy with your decision you
>got a good deal for you. We like to buy what we like whether what we
>like is a good product or not. When we put aside the good feeling and
>look only at the facts we make better decisions.
You have to despise the guy for his tactics to make it law to use his
product.
You have to admire the guy for taking the risk and starting his own
business with the high quality saw.
You have to step back from all of that and make a decision based on
facts and what is best for you.
On Mon, 10 Mar 2014 00:23:29 +0000 (UTC), Larry Blanchard
<[email protected]> wrote:
>On Sun, 09 Mar 2014 13:03:10 -0400, none wrote:
>
>> As usual, your fact are full of holes.
>>
>> Powermatic PM2000 ~ $3000
>> Delta 36-L352 ~ $3000
>> SawStop Professional cabinet saw ~ $3000
>
>That's the low end Sawstop. The original is about $4500/
His whole example was done to lie. It's his MO.
On Sun, 09 Mar 2014 13:03:10 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>On Sun, 09 Mar 2014 12:42:21 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>>Fact, Jack. That's *exactly* the decision I was confronted with.
>>$1600 for the Unisaw - $3500 for the "equivalent" SawStop. The $1600
>>was do-able (up from the $1400 for the budgeted Griz). $3500 would
>>have had me laughed out of the "capital acquisition" meeting.
>
>As usual, your fact are full of holes.
Now you're calling me a liar. Figures.
>Powermatic PM2000 ~ $3000
>Delta 36-L352 ~ $3000
>SawStop Professional cabinet saw ~ $3000
>
>http://www.consumersearch.com/table-saw-reviews/cabinet-saws
I'm telling you WHAT MY DECISION WAS. GOT IT?
>The REAL TRUTH is that MOST SawStop naysayers like you are too busy
>letting your emotions overrule your common sense. You hate GASS'
>business tactics so much that you'll consider any excuse to exclude a
>SawStop from your purchasing condition.
Bullshit. Like most suck-ups, you're talking out both sides of your
mouth. You admit that price is an issue and that there is a decision
to be made, yet you denigrate those who don't agree with a choice
you've NEVER MADE and probably never will.
I don't care that some love SawStop. Sobeit. Their decision.
However, when some know-nothing jumps into the fray, talking out both
sided of his mouth, it's really funny.
Ed Pawlowski <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Mar 2014 12:06:28 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>>
>> This whole disagreement on the SawStop is mostly based on whether you
>> have a dislike for the SawStop product because of it's owner or if you
>> simply judge the product on it's own merits. Again if you let emotion
>> play a part of your decision making you may not get the best deal on
>> paper. As with anything you buy if you are happy with your decision you
>> got a good deal for you. We like to buy what we like whether what we
>> like is a good product or not. When we put aside the good feeling and
>> look only at the facts we make better decisions.
>
>
> You have to despise the guy for his tactics to make it law to use his
> product.
>
> You have to admire the guy for taking the risk and starting his own
> business with the high quality saw.
>
> You have to step back from all of that and make a decision based on
> facts and what is best for you.
That's it in a nutshell!
On 3/10/2014 11:24 AM, [email protected] wrote:
> On Mon, 10 Mar 2014 00:23:29 +0000 (UTC), Larry Blanchard
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 09 Mar 2014 13:03:10 -0400, none wrote:
>>
>>> As usual, your fact are full of holes.
>>>
>>> Powermatic PM2000 ~ $3000
>>> Delta 36-L352 ~ $3000
>>> SawStop Professional cabinet saw ~ $3000
>>
>> That's the low end Sawstop. The original is about $4500/
>
> His whole example was done to lie. It's his MO.
>
Well Larry's comments are incorrect too. The $3K SawStop is the
Professional Cabinet saw with 52" fence and 3hp motor, not the
Contractors saw. And the Industrial, original, in the common set up is
$4K. less with a shorter than 52" fence.
Leon <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:
>> This comment will undoubtedly loose the usual shitstorm of debate on
>> a subject that has already been flogged to death. I am strongly of
>> the opinion that having a saw with an idiot-proof feature allows you
>> to be more of an idiot.
>>
> Said by the idiot. I am as entitled to voice my opinion as any one
> here but insinuating that someone becomes more of an idiot because his
> or her beliefs don't align with yours speaks volumes about you.
>
> If you can afford the saw it is a no brainier.
Didn't call anyone an idiot, nor did I suggest that you weren't entitled to
the opinion which you have expressed at least ten thousand times on this
forum. Why so defensive?
Larry Blanchard <[email protected]> wrote in news:lf8mlc$6pe$1
@speranza.aioe.org:
> On Wed, 05 Mar 2014 19:55:51 -0600, Leon wrote:
>
>
> "allows you to be more of an idiot."
>
> "someone becomes more of an idiot"
>
> Last time I looked "allows" and "becomes" were not synonyms.
>
> And if you don't think that a belief that an activity cannot hurt one
> allows one to become more careless, I suggest you ask any psychologist.
>
> Yes, the Sawstop is a good saw. Yes, it is the safest saw on the
> market. No, it is not a revealed truth from Heaven :-).
>
> You call the OP an idiot. Woodchucker calls him a troll. Seems a bit
> harsh for what to me is a defensible point of view.
>
> That psychologist can also acquaint you with the proclivity of someone
> who owns a product to get defensive when the product is criticized. The
> more expensive the product, the more defensive :-).
>
Thanks, Larry.
Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet> wrote in
news:[email protected]:
>>>> This comment will undoubtedly loose the usual shitstorm of debate
>>>> on a subject that has already been flogged to death. I am strongly
>>>> of the opinion that having a saw with an idiot-proof feature allows
>>>> you to be more of an idiot.
>>>>
>>> Said by the idiot. I am as entitled to voice my opinion as any one
>>> here but insinuating that someone becomes more of an idiot because
>>> his or her beliefs don't align with yours speaks volumes about you.
>>>
>>> If you can afford the saw it is a no brainier.
>>
>> Didn't call anyone an idiot, nor did I suggest that you weren't
>> entitled to the opinion which you have expressed at least ten
>> thousand times on this forum. Why so defensive?
>>
>
>
>
> Let me quote you here.
>
> I am strongly of the opinion that having a saw with an
> idiot-proof
> feature allows you to be more of an idiot.
>
> To be able to be more of an idiot you first have to be an idiot. If
> you are not an idiot at all you cannot be more of one.
We're all idiots to some degree, Leon. For instance, some people can't
tell the difference between a huge generalization and a personal attack.
> So while you did not directly name names you did indicate that "having
> a saw with an idiot-proof feature" allows a you to be more of an
> idiot.
>
> You accomplished what you set out to do, offend any one recommending,
> considering, or using a SawStop.
All I set out to do was offer my opinion. You disagree with my opinion.
And you go on to make your argument for the ten-thousand and one-th
time.
> Further you stated,
>
> For the last ten years I've used a table saw daily, and for
> thirty
> or so years prior to that, I'd used one at least a few of times a
> week. A fewyouthful misadventures with kickback taught me respect. I'm
> not foolhardy enough to say I can't get hurt again, but if I do, it
> won't be because I have a false sense of security from having a saw
> that makes a workshop safe for hot dogs.
>
>
> Now certainly you understand that with all of your claimed vast years
> of extensive and continuous use of a TS that a beginner or a person
> clearly not as smart as you might benefit from a safer saw, one that
> can prevent a serious cut should that person with much much much less
> experience than you have a slip in judgement or do something foolish.
Which is why all entry-level table saws are equipped with the Saw Stop,
right? Because all first-time buyers are willing and able to shell out
the extra $$$ that the hot-dog nicking safety device costs.
No?
Please elaborate.
> You admit that with your youthful adventures with kickback, and since
> you mentioned adventures as plural, one would deduct that either you
> are a slow learner or that there actually are numerous possibilities
> of being hurt on a TS. AAMOF there is not a publication that can
> cover every possible instance of what can prevent an accident. Only
> experience helps to fill in the gaps.
>
> And to sum up your way of thinking, If you get hurt using a TS, that
> is less safe to use, it is your own fault.
Absolutely. Personal responsibility is a wonderful thing. Can't
recommend it enough. Should be taught in school, even.
> Never mind the fact that
> if you were using a safer saw you might not get hurt. Have you ever
> considered that if you cut you finger or hand it is your fault because
> you were not using a SawStop?
Huh??? Of course it would be my fault. See above re: personal
responsibility.
> And with your comment below, you clearly have not thought out what
> your words really mean.
>
> I'm not foolhardy enough to say I can't get hurt again, but if I
> do, it won't be because I have a false sense of security from having a
> saw that makes a workshop safe for hot dogs.
>
>
> If you do get hurt again, it will absolutely be because you have a
> false sense of security. I'm not calling you stupid but do you think
> that you would actually do something purposely wrong? If you get hurt
> again is will because you either purposely did something wrong or
> because you do not have enough knowledge/experience to know that the
> operation you are performing can harm you. Believe me, if you think
> that you know all of the ways to prevent being harmed on the TS you
> are the prime target of SawStop. If you know you don't know every way
> of being harmed on a TS you are also a prime target of SawStop.
As I said earlier, I'm not enough of a fool to think that I can't get
hurt by a table saw. I remind myself EVERY TIME I turn the thing on. I'm
also not enough of a fool to think that the overpriced safety device you
defend so rabidly will prevent anything other than the type of accident
caused by carelessness, and is not designed to prevent any of the other
kinds of harm the thing can throw my way if I use it incorrectly.
On 3/5/2014 10:18 PM, Lew Hodgett wrote:
> Leon wrote:
>
>> On my Win 7 PC using Chrome, my iPad, iPhone using Safari simply
>> typing
>> SawStop.com and pressing enter I get what I expect, the SawStop web
>> site.
>> You don't?
> --------------------------------
> Yes but that is 11 keystrokes, not 8.
>
> Lew
>
>
>
>
Ok..
On 3/4/2014 9:28 PM, [email protected] wrote:
> hey guys, i am looking to purchase a new table saw.......have a 10 year
> old craftsman contractor saw and need to upgrade. i will have to put it
> into my basement with limited space, so looking for decent contractor saw.
> This Grizzly http://www.grizzly.com/products/Contractor-Style-Saw/G0732
> is the saw i am leaning towards purchasing. are there any better options in
> this price range? tia
>
And now I realized that this was not posted on March 4th a couple of
days ago.. ;~(
On 3/4/2014 9:28 PM, [email protected] wrote:
> hey guys, i am looking to purchase a new table saw.......have a 10 year
> old craftsman contractor saw and need to upgrade. i will have to put it
> into my basement with limited space, so looking for decent contractor saw.
> This Grizzly http://www.grizzly.com/products/Contractor-Style-Saw/G0732
> is the saw i am leaning towards purchasing. are there any better options in
> this price range? tia
>
To tell you the truth this saw strongly resembles the Craftsman TS that
I bought in 1983 and used for 16 years and had made a few modifications
for improved accuracy. That made it tolerable for precision work.
Unless your current saw is flat worn out, you might not be upgrading at all.
I would be very concerned with the tilt wheel and how it is attached to
the saw. The old Craftsman saws tilt wheel and shaft attached to the
body/trunnion and on the handle end to the side of the saw. The side of
the saw was simply sheet metal and if the side of the saw flexed it
caused the tilt shaft and trunnion to change bevel settings. Hense the
lock lever to help prevent movement after an adjustment on the
Craftsman. Looking at the parts illustration it appears that part# 81
is a stiffener to help minimize the tendency. That may or may not be
adequate for your purpose. Parts 58 and 59 are the locking bolt and
lever to further minimize movement.
The rip fence is basically the same style as the old Craftsman and
probably will be difficult to keep properly adjusted. It locks at the
back end and it is very common for the locking action to pull the fence
out of parallel with the blade when engaged. If it were me I would
look for a Beisemeyer style fence, these are rock solid and almost never
need adjustment after initial set up. They only lock down on the front bar.
Just considering Grizzly I would recommend upgrading to at least this
saw if for no other reason to get the better style rip fence. There are
several other reasons to list but the fence is probably never going to
need to be replaced if precision is what you are looking to achieve.
http://www.grizzly.com/products/10-Hybrid-Table-Saw-with-Riving-Knife-Polar-Bear-Series/G0715P
On 3/8/2014 10:05 PM, woodchucker wrote:
> On 3/8/2014 10:14 PM, Elrond Hubbard wrote:
>> Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet> wrote in
>> news:[email protected]:
>>
>>>>>> This comment will undoubtedly loose the usual shitstorm of debate
>>>>>> on a subject that has already been flogged to death. I am strongly
>>>>>> of the opinion that having a saw with an idiot-proof feature allows
>>>>>> you to be more of an idiot.
>>>>>>
>>>>> Said by the idiot. I am as entitled to voice my opinion as any one
>>>>> here but insinuating that someone becomes more of an idiot because
>>>>> his or her beliefs don't align with yours speaks volumes about you.
>>>>>
>>>>> If you can afford the saw it is a no brainier.
>>>>
>>>> Didn't call anyone an idiot, nor did I suggest that you weren't
>>>> entitled to the opinion which you have expressed at least ten
>>>> thousand times on this forum. Why so defensive?
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Let me quote you here.
>>>
>>> I am strongly of the opinion that having a saw with an
>>> idiot-proof
>>> feature allows you to be more of an idiot.
>>>
>>> To be able to be more of an idiot you first have to be an idiot. If
>>> you are not an idiot at all you cannot be more of one.
>>
>>
>> We're all idiots to some degree, Leon. For instance, some people can't
>> tell the difference between a huge generalization and a personal attack.
>>
>>
>>> So while you did not directly name names you did indicate that "having
>>> a saw with an idiot-proof feature" allows a you to be more of an
>>> idiot.
>>>
>>> You accomplished what you set out to do, offend any one recommending,
>>> considering, or using a SawStop.
>>
>>
>> All I set out to do was offer my opinion. You disagree with my opinion.
>> And you go on to make your argument for the ten-thousand and one-th
>> time.
>>
>>
>>> Further you stated,
>>>
>>> For the last ten years I've used a table saw daily, and for
>>> thirty
>>> or so years prior to that, I'd used one at least a few of times a
>>> week. A fewyouthful misadventures with kickback taught me respect. I'm
>>> not foolhardy enough to say I can't get hurt again, but if I do, it
>>> won't be because I have a false sense of security from having a saw
>>> that makes a workshop safe for hot dogs.
>>>
>>>
>>> Now certainly you understand that with all of your claimed vast years
>>> of extensive and continuous use of a TS that a beginner or a person
>>> clearly not as smart as you might benefit from a safer saw, one that
>>> can prevent a serious cut should that person with much much much less
>>> experience than you have a slip in judgement or do something foolish.
>>
>> Which is why all entry-level table saws are equipped with the Saw Stop,
>> right? Because all first-time buyers are willing and able to shell out
>> the extra $$$ that the hot-dog nicking safety device costs.
>>
>> No?
>>
>> Please elaborate.
>>
>>
>>> You admit that with your youthful adventures with kickback, and since
>>> you mentioned adventures as plural, one would deduct that either you
>>> are a slow learner or that there actually are numerous possibilities
>>> of being hurt on a TS. AAMOF there is not a publication that can
>>> cover every possible instance of what can prevent an accident. Only
>>> experience helps to fill in the gaps.
>>>
>>> And to sum up your way of thinking, If you get hurt using a TS, that
>>> is less safe to use, it is your own fault.
>>
>>
>>
>> Absolutely. Personal responsibility is a wonderful thing. Can't
>> recommend it enough. Should be taught in school, even.
>>
>>
>>
>>> Never mind the fact that
>>> if you were using a safer saw you might not get hurt. Have you ever
>>> considered that if you cut you finger or hand it is your fault because
>>> you were not using a SawStop?
>>
>>
>>
>> Huh??? Of course it would be my fault. See above re: personal
>> responsibility.
>>
>>
>>
>>> And with your comment below, you clearly have not thought out what
>>> your words really mean.
>>>
>>> I'm not foolhardy enough to say I can't get hurt again, but if I
>>> do, it won't be because I have a false sense of security from having a
>>> saw that makes a workshop safe for hot dogs.
>>>
>>>
>>> If you do get hurt again, it will absolutely be because you have a
>>> false sense of security. I'm not calling you stupid but do you think
>>> that you would actually do something purposely wrong? If you get hurt
>>> again is will because you either purposely did something wrong or
>>> because you do not have enough knowledge/experience to know that the
>>> operation you are performing can harm you. Believe me, if you think
>>> that you know all of the ways to prevent being harmed on the TS you
>>> are the prime target of SawStop. If you know you don't know every way
>>> of being harmed on a TS you are also a prime target of SawStop.
>>
>>
>> As I said earlier, I'm not enough of a fool to think that I can't get
>> hurt by a table saw. I remind myself EVERY TIME I turn the thing on. I'm
>> also not enough of a fool to think that the overpriced safety device you
>> defend so rabidly will prevent anything other than the type of accident
>> caused by carelessness, and is not designed to prevent any of the other
>> kinds of harm the thing can throw my way if I use it incorrectly.
>>
>>
> So looking back I did not see a previous post from Elron Hubbard, so who
> did you post your opinion as???
>
>
>
Obliviously a sock puppet that I have wasted enough time on.
On Tuesday, March 4, 2014 9:28:34 PM UTC-6, [email protected] wrote:
> hey guys, i am looking to purchase a new table saw.......have a 10 year
>=20
> old craftsman contractor saw and need to upgrade. i will have to put it
>=20
> into my basement with limited space, so looking for decent contractor saw=
.=20
>=20
> This Grizzly http://www.grizzly.com/products/Contractor-Style-Saw/G0732 =
=20
>=20
> is the saw i am leaning towards purchasing. are there any better options=
in
>=20
> this price range? tia
Our son has owned what is pretty much that contractor's saw for about seven=
years. I say "pretty much" because his has the Shop Fox Classic Aluminum =
fence. If that fence is available for this saw (upgrade, another model) I =
would go for it. I have owned a Grizzly 1023 for about twelve years and t=
hat saw has the Shop Fox original iron fence which is pretty much a Bieseme=
yer clone. Love the entire package and the fence is very nice. We helped =
him finish out his house right after he bought it and the saw was very nice=
to use.
BTW - You might want to consider moving up to the Grizzly 1023 series. Sol=
id as a rock, good dust control and plenty of power and it sits in the same=
size footprint.
Ron
On Wednesday, March 12, 2014 7:44:16 AM UTC-5, [email protected] wrote:
> On Tuesday, March 4, 2014 9:28:34 PM UTC-6, [email protected] wrote:
>=20
> > hey guys, i am looking to purchase a new table saw.......have a 10 ye=
ar
>=20
> >=20
>=20
> > old craftsman contractor saw and need to upgrade. i will have to put i=
t
>=20
> >=20
>=20
> > into my basement with limited space, so looking for decent contractor s=
aw.=20
>=20
> >=20
>=20
> > This Grizzly http://www.grizzly.com/products/Contractor-Style-Saw/G073=
2 =20
>=20
> >=20
>=20
> > is the saw i am leaning towards purchasing. are there any better optio=
ns in
>=20
> >=20
>=20
> > this price range? tia
>=20
>=20
>=20
> Our son has owned what is pretty much that contractor's saw for about sev=
en years. I say "pretty much" because his has the Shop Fox Classic Aluminu=
m fence. If that fence is available for this saw (upgrade, another model) =
I would go for it. I have owned a Grizzly 1023 for about twelve years and=
that saw has the Shop Fox original iron fence which is pretty much a Biese=
meyer clone. Love the entire package and the fence is very nice. We helpe=
d him finish out his house right after he bought it and the saw was very ni=
ce to use.
>=20
>=20
>=20
> BTW - You might want to consider moving up to the Grizzly 1023 series. S=
olid as a rock, good dust control and plenty of power and it sits in the sa=
me size footprint.
>=20
>=20
>=20
> Ron
OH - And what Ed P. Said above. The Saw Stop is a great looking machine bu=
t it is priced out of some people's range.
On Sun, 09 Mar 2014 11:06:49 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>Not like everything else. The difference is the cost (and the
>patents). Let's do this again after the patents run out.
I'm wondering how many less than ten fingered woodworking people would
agree with you?
On Tue, 11 Mar 2014 03:15:05 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>On Mon, 10 Mar 2014 12:24:05 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>>His whole example was done to lie. It's his MO.
>
>I read your crap for its entertainment value. You don't like what I
>post? Take some of your own advice and don't read it.
You're lying again. You can't even read.
>Not that I expected anything different, but you really are a senile
>old fool aren't you?
More proof of your lies. Keep it up. You'll prove to everyone else
what I've known for a long time.
On Wed, 05 Mar 2014 19:55:51 -0600, Leon <[email protected]> wrote:
>If you can afford the saw it is a no brainer.
Completely agree. Putting the cost aside, it's no different than a
seat belt in a car. Just common sense.
On 3/4/14, 9:39 PM, woodchucker wrote:
> On 3/4/2014 10:39 PM, woodchucker wrote:
>> On 3/4/2014 10:28 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>>> hey guys, i am looking to purchase a new table saw.......have a
>>> 10 year old craftsman contractor saw and need to upgrade. i will
>>> have to put it into my basement with limited space, so looking
>>> for decent contractor saw. This Grizzly
>>> http://www.grizzly.com/products/Contractor-Style-Saw/G0732 is the
>>> saw i am leaning towards purchasing. are there any better
>>> options in this price range? tia
>>>
>> Go for a hybrid. It will at least control dust more easily. And
>> this has more upgrades, fence, weight,
>>
>>
>>
> http://www.grizzly.com/products/10-Hybrid-Table-Saw-with-Riving-Knife-Polar-Bear-Series-/G0715P
>
>
>
That's what I was going to suggest. For only $150 more, it's a heck of
a lot more saw.
The contractor one in your original link isn't any better than the
Ridgid from Home Depot which can be found for under $500.
--
-MIKE-
"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com
[email protected]
---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply
On 3/5/14, 12:09 AM, Lew Hodgett wrote:
> Update:
>
> This is a better link:
>
> http://tinyurl.com/cz2lu
>
> Lew
> ---------------------------------------------------------
You needed tinyurl for http://www.sawstop.com?
--
-MIKE-
"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com
[email protected]
---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply
On Wed, 05 Mar 2014 00:04:55 -0600, -MIKE- wrote:
> The contractor one in your original link isn't any better than the
> Ridgid from Home Depot which can be found for under $500.
Beat me to it - and HD has a better warranty.
For something in between the prices, look at:
<http://www.ebay.com/itm/Steel-City-35990CS-10-Cast-Steel-Contractor-
Table-Saw-30-T-Square-Fence-/400664027000?_trksid=p2054897.l4275>
The table mounted trunnions alone are worth the price differential.
--
Where have all the flowers gone? Pete Seeger 1919-2014
On Thu, 06 Mar 2014 01:13:25 +0000, Tyrone Tiews wrote:
> This comment will undoubtedly loose the usual shitstorm of debate on a
> subject that has already been flogged to death. I am strongly of the
> opinion that having a saw with an idiot-proof feature allows you to be
> more of an idiot.
Amen!
--
Where have all the flowers gone? Pete Seeger 1919-2014
On Wed, 05 Mar 2014 19:55:51 -0600, Leon wrote:
"allows you to be more of an idiot."
"someone becomes more of an idiot"
Last time I looked "allows" and "becomes" were not synonyms.
And if you don't think that a belief that an activity cannot hurt one
allows one to become more careless, I suggest you ask any psychologist.
Yes, the Sawstop is a good saw. Yes, it is the safest saw on the
market. No, it is not a revealed truth from Heaven :-).
You call the OP an idiot. Woodchucker calls him a troll. Seems a bit
harsh for what to me is a defensible point of view.
That psychologist can also acquaint you with the proclivity of someone
who owns a product to get defensive when the product is criticized. The
more expensive the product, the more defensive :-).
--
Where have all the flowers gone? Pete Seeger 1919-2014
On Wed, 05 Mar 2014 21:19:18 -0600, Leon wrote:
> You might want to straighten out who said what. I did not call the OP
> an idiot, Tirome called any one using an idiot proof machine an idiot.
Sorry, Leon. The first sentence of your reply to Tirome was:
"Said by the idiot."
--
Where have all the flowers gone? Pete Seeger 1919-2014
In article <[email protected]>
Larry Blanchard <[email protected]> writes:
>On Wed, 05 Mar 2014 21:19:18 -0600, Leon wrote:
>
>> You might want to straighten out who said what. I did not call the OP
>> an idiot, Tirome called any one using an idiot proof machine an idiot.
>
>Sorry, Leon. The first sentence of your reply to Tirome was:
>
>"Said by the idiot."
Unless there is name swapping going on, Tyrone was not the OP.
The OPP alleges to be "buckwheat."
--
Drew Lawson I had planned to be dead by now, but
the schedule slipped, they do that.
-- Casady
On 3/5/2014 12:09 AM, Lew Hodgett wrote:
> Update:
>
> This is a better link:
>
> http://tinyurl.com/cz2lu
>
> Lew
> ---------------------------------------------------------
> "Lew Hodgett" wrote:
>>
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> hey guys, i am looking to purchase a new table saw.......have a
>>> 10 year
>>> old craftsman contractor saw and need to upgrade. i will have to
>>> put it
>>> into my basement with limited space, so looking for decent
>>> contractor saw.
>>> This Grizzly
>>> http://www.grizzly.com/products/Contractor-Style-Saw/G0732
>>> is the saw i am leaning towards purchasing. are there any better
>>> options in
>>> this price range?
>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> In this day and age you owe it to yourself to take a serious look at
>> SawStop products.
>>
>> There are several on the wrec who have purchased SawStop within the
>> last
>> 5 years who can comment on specifics.
>>
>> http://tinyurl.com/m56fx57
>>
>>
>> Have fun
>>
>>
>> Lew
>>
>>
>>
>
>
Excellent suggestion Lew! ;~) But sawstop.com is a shorter URL. ;~)
No back to the OP.
And in all seriousness this is not an inexpensive saw. Entry level is
probably going to cost an additional $1K over what you are currently
looking at.
Now something you should be considering. You obviously are serious
about this hobby and plan to continue woodworking since this is going to
be a replacement saw. Don't ask yourself if you can afford the SawStop,
ask yourself if you can afford to loose a finger or the expense of the ER.
There are other fine offerings but so far none have your back should
you, when you , make that mistake, have a lapse in judgement, or do
something stupid.
The first time the saw saves your butt is when the saw more than pays
for it self.
On 3/9/2014 8:23 PM, Bill wrote:
> They eventually moved most of the other saws out of the place. My
> thinking is that their commissions and markups are much higher on
> SawStop. They act in a way which is consistent with that. I don't see
> them doing any other sort of table saw demonstrations on Saturday
> morning! I don't begrudge them anything, I'm sure it's a tough
> business to maintain. I could do with out the "selling by fear" sales
> tactic.
It could well be that the fear of a lawsuit for selling something a jury
would deem unsafe is at least part of that reason.
Most of the jury pool is sufficiently dumbed down to believe anything a
lawyer tells them; and it is unlikely that they have ever operated a
table saw, or even seen one, since shop classes were considered too
dangerous when they were little yuppies-in-training.
--
eWoodShop: www.eWoodShop.com
Wood Shop: www.e-WoodShop.net
https://www.google.com/+eWoodShop
https://plus.google.com/+KarlCaillouet/posts
http://www.custommade.com/by/ewoodshop/
KarlCaillouet@ (the obvious)
On 3/10/2014 5:10 PM, Bill wrote:
> Mike Marlow wrote:
>> Leon wrote:
>>
>>> Yes it is BUT many bars have been held liable for over serving
>>> customers that were involved in an accident. The bar did not make
>>> the spirits and they did not make the customer drink the drink....
>>>
>> Yes, but that's quite a bit different.
>
> I agree. I doubt that even Leon even believes it at this point.
>
What I believe and what I think is right are two different things.
I believe that it is not beyond a possibility that if you are in any way
involved or associated with any form of delivery of a product that may
at any time cause harm to the end user that an ambulance chaser has you
on his radar.
Is that right? no. IMHO only the manufacturer of a defective product
should be held liable. No one in between.
On 3/9/2014 8:17 PM, Leon wrote:
> Ironically the hydraulic lift mobile base that SS sells for the
> industrial saw moves the saw with a push of the finger. I have to be
> careful not to leave my saw unattended in the lifted position. My
> garage has a slight slope towards the street and it will roll out of the
> garage on it's own.
Be sure to nudge it in this direction should that happen. I know it's 24
miles, but I'd hate to see you get hurt on a SawStop trying to push it
uphill. ;)
--
eWoodShop: www.eWoodShop.com
Wood Shop: www.e-WoodShop.net
https://www.google.com/+eWoodShop
https://plus.google.com/+KarlCaillouet/posts
http://www.custommade.com/by/ewoodshop/
KarlCaillouet@ (the obvious)
On 3/10/2014 12:27 AM, Leon wrote:
> On 3/9/2014 9:20 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>> On 3/9/2014 8:52 PM, Bill wrote:
>>
>>>> Have you actually asked a store that sells SawStop how the SS units
>>>> sell compared to the other brands?
>>>
>>> My local Woodcraft store says nobody buys anything else. I don't
>>> believe them.
>>>
>>
>> They don't even list Delta on their website, but lots of SawStop.
>>
>
> Retail 101, you sell and stock to meet demand.
Possibly another economic factor too. Lawyers tend to drag everyone
into the suits that has loose change in their pockets. "Woodcraft
knowingly sold this XYZ brand to my client knowing he could cut his
penis off if he jumped on top of the saw"
On Tue, 11 Mar 2014 20:51:52 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet>
wrote:
>On 3/11/2014 2:28 PM, Bill wrote:
>> Leon wrote:
>>>
>>> This discussion is not so much about right or wrong so much as can you
>>> afford to defend yourself if you don't have liability insurance.
>>>
>> Just a comment (since you were thoughtful enough to consider my "green
>> night-crawler case"). Some entity that doesn't have enough resources
>> to defend itself, probably doesn't make much of a legal target. Of
>> course, I'm sure there is a middle ground where it is profitable...
>>
>> BTW, I appreciate you pointing out the tactic that car-salesman might
>> use--to get you behind the wheel to give you the "new car rush". It has
>> never occurred to me.
>>
>> Bill
>
>If buying new from a dealer....
>
>Want another hint? Don't buy a vehicle on the day that you test drive
>it. And do let the salesman know up front.
The last two, I bought on the same day (well, my truck wasn't exactly
the same one - had to get it from another dealer). No issues, though.
The deals were between me and Ford. Even the saleswoman got paid
directly by Ford. I paid essentially invoice minus cashbacks ($8K, in
the case of the truck ;-).
>You want to test drive a vehicle after you have narrowed down the field
>of contenders. You don't want to test drive a vehicle you don't like to
>start with.
Not worth my time or the waste of the salesman's time.
>Once you have settled on acceptable choices go to KBB or Edmunds and
>build the vehicles you want. Be Specific. You will get a price on the
>vehicle that you built and what you can expect to pay in your area.
You can do that on the manufacturer's web site.
>Next, let the web site refer you to a dealer of your choice and let them
>respond by e-mail. The dealer will know what you are looking for and
>know that you know what people are actually paying. Typically you will
>be dealing with an internet sales manager and normally customers that
>are brought in this way are serious about buying so they normally will
>make you a good offer right up front before coming in. If you like the
>offer make an appointment and take the test drive. They will almost
>always show you vehicle with at least as many options as you were
>looking for. It is a given that anything that the dealer adds on is
>going to be included in the deal at no additional cost.
I had zero luck with that process. The Internet sales manager only
tried to sell me what he had, and didn't care what I wanted. I went
to a different dealership (they lost two sales - a week apart). I let
them know it, the next time they spammed me.
>Leave emotion out of the experience, this is a business negotiation and
>transaction. Don't waste their time. The more respectful you are of
>their time the more likely they will not let something relatively simple
>or inexpensive spoil the deal.
+1
On 3/11/2014 2:28 PM, Bill wrote:
> Leon wrote:
>>
>> This discussion is not so much about right or wrong so much as can you
>> afford to defend yourself if you don't have liability insurance.
>>
> Just a comment (since you were thoughtful enough to consider my "green
> night-crawler case"). Some entity that doesn't have enough resources
> to defend itself, probably doesn't make much of a legal target. Of
> course, I'm sure there is a middle ground where it is profitable...
>
> BTW, I appreciate you pointing out the tactic that car-salesman might
> use--to get you behind the wheel to give you the "new car rush". It has
> never occurred to me.
>
> Bill
If buying new from a dealer....
Want another hint? Don't buy a vehicle on the day that you test drive
it. And do let the salesman know up front.
You want to test drive a vehicle after you have narrowed down the field
of contenders. You don't want to test drive a vehicle you don't like to
start with.
Once you have settled on acceptable choices go to KBB or Edmunds and
build the vehicles you want. Be Specific. You will get a price on the
vehicle that you built and what you can expect to pay in your area.
Next, let the web site refer you to a dealer of your choice and let them
respond by e-mail. The dealer will know what you are looking for and
know that you know what people are actually paying. Typically you will
be dealing with an internet sales manager and normally customers that
are brought in this way are serious about buying so they normally will
make you a good offer right up front before coming in. If you like the
offer make an appointment and take the test drive. They will almost
always show you vehicle with at least as many options as you were
looking for. It is a given that anything that the dealer adds on is
going to be included in the deal at no additional cost.
Leave emotion out of the experience, this is a business negotiation and
transaction. Don't waste their time. The more respectful you are of
their time the more likely they will not let something relatively simple
or inexpensive spoil the deal.
On 3/9/2014 10:28 AM, [email protected] wrote:
some snip...but..
> The SawStop mechanism DOES NOT double the price of the saw. It doesn't
> even come close. The SawStop tablesaw itself is a well made, very
> decent operating tablesaw with top notch fit and finish.
>
> There's a number of regular $3000 tablesaws on the market and the
> SawStop is as good if not better than all of them.
>
And that's a consensus or just an opinion. ;-)
On Mon, 10 Mar 2014 12:45:47 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet>
wrote:
>On 3/10/2014 12:16 PM, Mike Marlow wrote:
>> Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>>> On 3/10/2014 12:27 AM, Leon wrote:
>>>> On 3/9/2014 9:20 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>>>>> On 3/9/2014 8:52 PM, Bill wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>> Have you actually asked a store that sells SawStop how the SS
>>>>>>> units sell compared to the other brands?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> My local Woodcraft store says nobody buys anything else. I don't
>>>>>> believe them.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> They don't even list Delta on their website, but lots of SawStop.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Retail 101, you sell and stock to meet demand.
>>>
>>> Possibly another economic factor too. Lawyers tend to drag everyone
>>> into the suits that has loose change in their pockets. "Woodcraft
>>> knowingly sold this XYZ brand to my client knowing he could cut his
>>> penis off if he jumped on top of the saw"
>>
>> I don't buy that one. I admit that I do not follow this stuff, but it seems
>> to me that the lawsuits that have been filed and won were against the
>> manufacturer and not against the retailers. It seems to me that retailers
>> are not being held accountable in the manner that you suggest.
>>
>
>
>While that is logical, only going after the manufacturer and not the
>retailer, even back in the 80's an AC/Delco wholesaler, that I was the
>GM for, had liability insurance in case there was a law suite from a
>failed part that we sold to a dealer. We installed nothing. Especially
>today a lawyer is going to go after who ever he can to win a case.
"Deep pocket" syndrome. Sue everyone and let the judge (god) figure
it out. "Joint and Several" liability laws make it so that even if
found 5% liable, you may be on the hook for 100% of the award. Not a
good position to be in.
On 3/10/2014 7:41 PM, [email protected] wrote:
> On Mon, 10 Mar 2014 12:45:47 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet>
> wrote:
>
>> On 3/10/2014 12:16 PM, Mike Marlow wrote:
>>> Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>>>> On 3/10/2014 12:27 AM, Leon wrote:
>>>>> On 3/9/2014 9:20 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>>>>>> On 3/9/2014 8:52 PM, Bill wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Have you actually asked a store that sells SawStop how the SS
>>>>>>>> units sell compared to the other brands?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> My local Woodcraft store says nobody buys anything else. I don't
>>>>>>> believe them.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> They don't even list Delta on their website, but lots of SawStop.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Retail 101, you sell and stock to meet demand.
>>>>
>>>> Possibly another economic factor too. Lawyers tend to drag everyone
>>>> into the suits that has loose change in their pockets. "Woodcraft
>>>> knowingly sold this XYZ brand to my client knowing he could cut his
>>>> penis off if he jumped on top of the saw"
>>>
>>> I don't buy that one. I admit that I do not follow this stuff, but it seems
>>> to me that the lawsuits that have been filed and won were against the
>>> manufacturer and not against the retailers. It seems to me that retailers
>>> are not being held accountable in the manner that you suggest.
>>>
>>
>>
>> While that is logical, only going after the manufacturer and not the
>> retailer, even back in the 80's an AC/Delco wholesaler, that I was the
>> GM for, had liability insurance in case there was a law suite from a
>> failed part that we sold to a dealer. We installed nothing. Especially
>> today a lawyer is going to go after who ever he can to win a case.
>
> "Deep pocket" syndrome. Sue everyone and let the judge (god) figure
> it out. "Joint and Several" liability laws make it so that even if
> found 5% liable, you may be on the hook for 100% of the award. Not a
> good position to be in.
>
Exactly. And why it is a smart move to have liability insurance so that
you don't have to hire an attorney to defend you. The insurance company
is going to pay the attorneys and they have much deeper pockets than the
most. Even if you are totally found innocent and owe nothing you are
out the expense of defending yourself and product liability insurance
for a retailer is probably going to be less expensive.
On 3/9/2014 3:26 PM, Leon wrote:
> On 3/9/2014 2:13 PM, Max wrote:
>> On 3/9/2014 10:28 AM, [email protected] wrote:
>>
>> some snip...but..
>>
>>> The SawStop mechanism DOES NOT double the price of the saw. It doesn't
>>> even come close. The SawStop tablesaw itself is a well made, very
>>> decent operating tablesaw with top notch fit and finish.
>>>
>>> There's a number of regular $3000 tablesaws on the market and the
>>> SawStop is as good if not better than all of them.
>>>
>>
>> And that's a consensus or just an opinion. ;-)
>>
>
>
> It is a consensus. Most all TS reports, with the SawStop involved,
> most always place the SawStop as a top quality machine.
>
>
> Simply the arbor/trunnion assembly is quite HD on all models when
> compared to the competition.
If it's a consensus how do other manufacturers manage to stay in business?
On Tue, 11 Mar 2014 08:06:34 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet>
wrote:
>On 3/10/2014 7:41 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>> On Mon, 10 Mar 2014 12:45:47 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 3/10/2014 12:16 PM, Mike Marlow wrote:
>>>> Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>>>>> On 3/10/2014 12:27 AM, Leon wrote:
>>>>>> On 3/9/2014 9:20 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>>>>>>> On 3/9/2014 8:52 PM, Bill wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Have you actually asked a store that sells SawStop how the SS
>>>>>>>>> units sell compared to the other brands?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> My local Woodcraft store says nobody buys anything else. I don't
>>>>>>>> believe them.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> They don't even list Delta on their website, but lots of SawStop.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Retail 101, you sell and stock to meet demand.
>>>>>
>>>>> Possibly another economic factor too. Lawyers tend to drag everyone
>>>>> into the suits that has loose change in their pockets. "Woodcraft
>>>>> knowingly sold this XYZ brand to my client knowing he could cut his
>>>>> penis off if he jumped on top of the saw"
>>>>
>>>> I don't buy that one. I admit that I do not follow this stuff, but it seems
>>>> to me that the lawsuits that have been filed and won were against the
>>>> manufacturer and not against the retailers. It seems to me that retailers
>>>> are not being held accountable in the manner that you suggest.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> While that is logical, only going after the manufacturer and not the
>>> retailer, even back in the 80's an AC/Delco wholesaler, that I was the
>>> GM for, had liability insurance in case there was a law suite from a
>>> failed part that we sold to a dealer. We installed nothing. Especially
>>> today a lawyer is going to go after who ever he can to win a case.
>>
>> "Deep pocket" syndrome. Sue everyone and let the judge (god) figure
>> it out. "Joint and Several" liability laws make it so that even if
>> found 5% liable, you may be on the hook for 100% of the award. Not a
>> good position to be in.
>>
>Exactly. And why it is a smart move to have liability insurance so that
>you don't have to hire an attorney to defend you. The insurance company
>is going to pay the attorneys and they have much deeper pockets than the
>most. Even if you are totally found innocent and owe nothing you are
>out the expense of defending yourself and product liability insurance
>for a retailer is probably going to be less expensive.
That's why I have a megabuck rider on my homeowner's insurance (covers
the cars, too). It's cheap "lawyer insurance".
On 3/9/2014 6:47 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> On 3/9/2014 8:06 PM, Max wrote:
>
>>>>
>>>> And that's a consensus or just an opinion. ;-)
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> It is a consensus. Most all TS reports, with the SawStop involved,
>>> most always place the SawStop as a top quality machine.
>>>
>>>
>>> Simply the arbor/trunnion assembly is quite HD on all models when
>>> compared to the competition.
>>
>> If it's a consensus how do other manufacturers manage to stay in
>> business?
>
> By making sales of tablesaws. While the consensus is Lamborghini is a
> fun car to drive to work, most of us can't afford one for an every day
> driver. Sears still sells a bunch of the $299 saws to people that would
> rather have a $1500 SawStop.
I had in mind the Unisaws and Powermatics that seem to be still selling.
I question the comparability of a Sears $299 table saw.
On 3/9/2014 6:53 PM, Leon wrote:
> On 3/9/2014 7:06 PM, Max wrote:
>> On 3/9/2014 3:26 PM, Leon wrote:
>>> On 3/9/2014 2:13 PM, Max wrote:
>>>> On 3/9/2014 10:28 AM, [email protected] wrote:
>>>>
>>>> some snip...but..
>>>>
>>>>> The SawStop mechanism DOES NOT double the price of the saw. It doesn't
>>>>> even come close. The SawStop tablesaw itself is a well made, very
>>>>> decent operating tablesaw with top notch fit and finish.
>>>>>
>>>>> There's a number of regular $3000 tablesaws on the market and the
>>>>> SawStop is as good if not better than all of them.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> And that's a consensus or just an opinion. ;-)
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> It is a consensus. Most all TS reports, with the SawStop involved,
>>> most always place the SawStop as a top quality machine.
>>>
>>>
>>> Simply the arbor/trunnion assembly is quite HD on all models when
>>> compared to the competition.
>>
>> If it's a consensus how do other manufacturers manage to stay in
>> business?
>
>
> That is kind of a jerk knee question. A bit of research would provide
> those answers.
>
> But,
>
> Delta by a thread. They are but a small fraction in size and in
> offerings compared to what they offered 5~8 years ago.
>
> Have you actually asked a store that sells SawStop how the SS units sell
> compared to the other brands?
>
No, Leon, I haven't. As I've said, I'm not questioning the quality of
the SawStop but rather the "consensus".
And not the consensus of just the "wreck". There must be a market for
the other "quality" table saws or the SawStop would put its competitors
out of business. (and not saying that won't happen either) ;-)
The last time this issue surfaced I mentioned that *if* I bought one the
first time that brake busted my saw and blade I would trade it for
a saw without the feature. In other words there's more to the equation
than saving a finger. For me.
"Bill" wrote
>
> They eventually moved most of the other saws out of the place. My
> thinking is that their commissions and markups are much higher on SawStop.
> They act in a way which is consistent with that. I don't see them doing
> any other sort of table saw demonstrations on Saturday morning! I don't
> begrudge them anything, I'm sure it's a tough business to maintain. I
> could do with out the "selling by fear" sales tactic.
>
I can't speak for woodcraft. They are a bit pricy, but do sell some quality
products. And any retail store that sells to a demographic that is up the
ladder from hobbyists or home repair guys wants to project an image. With
products to match that image.
I find it interesting that a store is selling a quality product and you
reduce this whole marketing and retailing approach as a "selling by fear"
sales tactic. Maybe it is just a sell a quality product because it makes
sense for our demographic and targeted market. Remember, you can get the
cheaper saw many other places. Not that many places to get a SawStop.
You seem strongly emotionally involved in this. Do you do this kind of
thing with other retailers? Or do you just reserve this kind of hostility
for Woodcraft? Or is it a SawStop thing?
You have to remember that the retail world is changing, big time. Office
Max is substantially reducing their stores. They do half of their business
online now. And almost a quarter of their in store sales is selling
computer printing supplies. You don't need a big box store to sell printing
supplies. Radio Shack is closing one quarter of their stores. I don't see
a future for Radio Shack. Retail is tough, and becoming more so every day.
Now, I don't want to make you consider things that you find totally
objectionable. But consider this. If Woodcraft fallowed a strategy that
you would find pleasing, they very well may be out of business in the near
future. You have to let them do what they have to survive in a increasing
competitive environment.
I also feel left out in various businesses product offerings. There has
been a number of innovative restaurants that have opened near me that I just
loved. I loved the food, environment, pricing, etc. And the all went out
of business. I do like barbeque joints though. I can bitch and complain
all I want. But guess what? I am not part of a demographic that would
support such a an eating establishment. If there were more people like me,
those place would still be in business. Without sufficient numbers, these
bright, creative ideas perish.
Sooo.........., I bitch and complain and get by.
On 3/10/2014 10:03 AM, Lee Michaels wrote:
>
>
> "Bill" wrote
>>
>> They eventually moved most of the other saws out of the place. My
>> thinking is that their commissions and markups are much higher on
>> SawStop. They act in a way which is consistent with that. I don't see
>> them doing any other sort of table saw demonstrations on Saturday
>> morning! I don't begrudge them anything, I'm sure it's a tough
>> business to maintain. I could do with out the "selling by fear" sales
>> tactic.
>>
> I can't speak for woodcraft. They are a bit pricy, but do sell some
> quality products. And any retail store that sells to a demographic that
> is up the ladder from hobbyists or home repair guys wants to project an
> image. With products to match that image.
>
> I find it interesting that a store is selling a quality product and you
> reduce this whole marketing and retailing approach as a "selling by
> fear" sales tactic. Maybe it is just a sell a quality product because
> it makes sense for our demographic and targeted market. Remember, you
> can get the cheaper saw many other places. Not that many places to get
> a SawStop.
>
> You seem strongly emotionally involved in this. Do you do this kind of
> thing with other retailers? Or do you just reserve this kind of
> hostility for Woodcraft? Or is it a SawStop thing?
>
> You have to remember that the retail world is changing, big time.
> Office Max is substantially reducing their stores. They do half of
> their business online now. And almost a quarter of their in store sales
> is selling computer printing supplies. You don't need a big box store to
> sell printing supplies. Radio Shack is closing one quarter of their
> stores. I don't see a future for Radio Shack. Retail is tough, and
> becoming more so every day.
>
> Now, I don't want to make you consider things that you find totally
> objectionable. But consider this. If Woodcraft fallowed a strategy
> that you would find pleasing, they very well may be out of business in
> the near future. You have to let them do what they have to survive in a
> increasing competitive environment.
>
> I also feel left out in various businesses product offerings. There has
> been a number of innovative restaurants that have opened near me that I
> just loved. I loved the food, environment, pricing, etc. And the all
> went out of business. I do like barbeque joints though. I can bitch
> and complain all I want. But guess what? I am not part of a
> demographic that would support such a an eating establishment. If there
> were more people like me, those place would still be in business.
> Without sufficient numbers, these bright, creative ideas perish.
>
> Sooo.........., I bitch and complain and get by.
>
Me too. ;-)
Leon wrote:
> Is that right? no. IMHO only the manufacturer of a defective
> product should be held liable. No one in between.
-------------------------------------------------------------
Mom & Pop Industries, capitalized for $1Meg manufactures a
product that is sold by Walmart.
During use, product fails and kills user.
Who do you think Larry the Lawyer is going to sue?
Lew
On 3/10/2014 7:37 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> On 3/10/2014 5:24 PM, Mike Marlow wrote:
>> Leon wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Yes it is BUT many bars have been held liable for over serving
>>> customers that were involved in an accident. The bar did not make
>>> the spirits and they did not make the customer drink the drink....
>>>
>>
>> Yes, but that's quite a bit different.
>>
>
> Is it? When I bought my Delta saw, the salesman gave me a 15 minute
> lesson in its operation and safety. If I went home and cut my hand off
> it would be easy to blame him for not giving mr a proper lesson.
I can see it now; If that happens then soon salespersons will be asking
customers to sign a release certifying that they are completely
satisfied that the salesperson gave a complete and thorough explanation
of all phases of operation including any potential danger or possible
accident that might occur during said customers ownership.....
How about driving lessons any time you buy a car?
Fracking lawyers...
LOL.
On 3/9/2014 7:06 PM, Max wrote:
> On 3/9/2014 3:26 PM, Leon wrote:
>> On 3/9/2014 2:13 PM, Max wrote:
>>> On 3/9/2014 10:28 AM, [email protected] wrote:
>>>
>>> some snip...but..
>>>
>>>> The SawStop mechanism DOES NOT double the price of the saw. It doesn't
>>>> even come close. The SawStop tablesaw itself is a well made, very
>>>> decent operating tablesaw with top notch fit and finish.
>>>>
>>>> There's a number of regular $3000 tablesaws on the market and the
>>>> SawStop is as good if not better than all of them.
>>>>
>>>
>>> And that's a consensus or just an opinion. ;-)
>>>
>>
>>
>> It is a consensus. Most all TS reports, with the SawStop involved,
>> most always place the SawStop as a top quality machine.
>>
>>
>> Simply the arbor/trunnion assembly is quite HD on all models when
>> compared to the competition.
>
> If it's a consensus how do other manufacturers manage to stay in business?
That is kind of a jerk knee question. A bit of research would provide
those answers.
But,
Delta by a thread. They are but a small fraction in size and in
offerings compared to what they offered 5~8 years ago.
Have you actually asked a store that sells SawStop how the SS units sell
compared to the other brands?
On Sun, 09 Mar 2014 13:46:49 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet>
wrote:
>On 3/9/2014 11:13 AM, Swingman wrote:
>> On 3/9/2014 10:35 AM, [email protected] wrote:
>>
>>> There is no such thing as "safe". The only question is how much are
>>> you willing to pay for each bit of "safety".
>>
>> Especially when paying in freedoms:
>>
>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=phBEhZK5pvY
>>
>>
>
>
>Buying yourself a gun for protection against the possibility of being
>attacked or robbed is costly. But NOT nearly as costly as losing your
>right to own that type of protection.
No one is asking you to loose your arm to buy a different brand.
>Out lawing guns will only take protection away from the law biding
>citizens. Criminals, the people we need guns to protect ourselves from,
>will be the only ones that will still have guns if we lose our rights to
>own guns.
Forcing SawStop on everyone will also take table saws away from a
*lot* of people.
>Some people know karate and don't need guns to begin with. These people
>know that the gun manufacturers are only out to make guns for profit and
>really don't care about your safety.
Nonsense. Karate is no replacement for a gun, no matter what Bruce
Lee movies show. I suppose all gun manufacturers all delete safeties
from their guns because they want them to be dangerous? Umm, get
real!
On 3/9/2014 9:20 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> On 3/9/2014 8:52 PM, Bill wrote:
>
>>> Have you actually asked a store that sells SawStop how the SS units
>>> sell compared to the other brands?
>>
>> My local Woodcraft store says nobody buys anything else. I don't
>> believe them.
>>
>
> They don't even list Delta on their website, but lots of SawStop.
>
Retail 101, you sell and stock to meet demand.
On Mon, 10 Mar 2014 19:18:10 -0700, "Lew Hodgett"
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Leon wrote:
>
>> Is that right? no. IMHO only the manufacturer of a defective
>> product should be held liable. No one in between.
>-------------------------------------------------------------
>Mom & Pop Industries, capitalized for $1Meg manufactures a
>product that is sold by Walmart.
>
>During use, product fails and kills user.
>
>Who do you think Larry the Lawyer is going to sue?
>
Everyone, including the UPS guy delivering the package.
>
On 3/9/2014 10:29 PM, Max wrote:
> On 3/9/2014 6:53 PM, Leon wrote:
>> On 3/9/2014 7:06 PM, Max wrote:
>>> On 3/9/2014 3:26 PM, Leon wrote:
>>>> On 3/9/2014 2:13 PM, Max wrote:
>>>>> On 3/9/2014 10:28 AM, [email protected] wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> some snip...but..
>>>>>
>>>>>> The SawStop mechanism DOES NOT double the price of the saw. It
>>>>>> doesn't
>>>>>> even come close. The SawStop tablesaw itself is a well made, very
>>>>>> decent operating tablesaw with top notch fit and finish.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> There's a number of regular $3000 tablesaws on the market and the
>>>>>> SawStop is as good if not better than all of them.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> And that's a consensus or just an opinion. ;-)
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> It is a consensus. Most all TS reports, with the SawStop involved,
>>>> most always place the SawStop as a top quality machine.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Simply the arbor/trunnion assembly is quite HD on all models when
>>>> compared to the competition.
>>>
>>> If it's a consensus how do other manufacturers manage to stay in
>>> business?
>>
>>
>> That is kind of a jerk knee question. A bit of research would provide
>> those answers.
>>
>> But,
>>
>> Delta by a thread. They are but a small fraction in size and in
>> offerings compared to what they offered 5~8 years ago.
>>
>> Have you actually asked a store that sells SawStop how the SS units sell
>> compared to the other brands?
>>
>
> No, Leon, I haven't. As I've said, I'm not questioning the quality of
> the SawStop but rather the "consensus".
> And not the consensus of just the "wreck". There must be a market for
> the other "quality" table saws or the SawStop would put its competitors
> out of business. (and not saying that won't happen either) ;-)
Repeating what I have mentioned in another part of this thread, there
have been numerous publications with comparisons and the SawStop tends
to come out on top. I did a lot of Googling prior to spending $4k for
my SS. And as I mentioned above, Delta is almost there and or was a
couple of years ago. I saw a video of their come back from the dead
production facility. A brand new facility IIRC. It at the time a
couple of years ago appeared to be about the size of a 15~20 bar
automotive repair shop. I was rather shocked.
>
> The last time this issue surfaced I mentioned that *if* I bought one the
> first time that brake busted my saw and blade I would trade it for
> a saw without the feature. In other words there's more to the equation
> than saving a finger. For me.
>
I don't think you would have any worries with the brake busting the saw.
The same contractor saw gets demonstrated time and again during most
wood working shows. If the contractor and pro versions operate in the
same manner there is a release of the arbor assembly as it drops below
the table surface. Energy is absorbed by the brake and the rubber
bumper stop at the bottom of the drop.
If the contractors saw can take the rigors of the brake engaging time
and again I seriously doubt that any thing in the industrial version
would be at risk with all of its mass under the table.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/lcb11211/8635558850/
On 3/9/2014 8:23 PM, Bill wrote:
> Leon wrote:
>> On 3/9/2014 7:52 PM, Bill wrote:
>>> Leon wrote:
>>>> On 3/9/2014 7:06 PM, Max wrote:
>>>>> On 3/9/2014 3:26 PM, Leon wrote:
>>>>>> On 3/9/2014 2:13 PM, Max wrote:
>>>>>>> On 3/9/2014 10:28 AM, [email protected] wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> some snip...but..
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The SawStop mechanism DOES NOT double the price of the saw. It
>>>>>>>> doesn't
>>>>>>>> even come close. The SawStop tablesaw itself is a well made, very
>>>>>>>> decent operating tablesaw with top notch fit and finish.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> There's a number of regular $3000 tablesaws on the market and the
>>>>>>>> SawStop is as good if not better than all of them.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> And that's a consensus or just an opinion. ;-)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It is a consensus. Most all TS reports, with the SawStop involved,
>>>>>> most always place the SawStop as a top quality machine.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Simply the arbor/trunnion assembly is quite HD on all models when
>>>>>> compared to the competition.
>>>>>
>>>>> If it's a consensus how do other manufacturers manage to stay in
>>>>> business?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> That is kind of a jerk knee question. A bit of research would provide
>>>> those answers.
>>>>
>>>> But,
>>>>
>>>> Delta by a thread. They are but a small fraction in size and in
>>>> offerings compared to what they offered 5~8 years ago.
>>>>
>>>> Have you actually asked a store that sells SawStop how the SS units
>>>> sell compared to the other brands?
>>>
>>> My local Woodcraft store says nobody buys anything else. I don't
>>> believe them.
>>>
>>
>> You may have been taking them a bit too literally. ;~) More
>> believable, my Woodcraft says that SawStop out sells all the other
>> brands combined.
>
> They eventually moved most of the other saws out of the place. My
> thinking is that their commissions and markups are much higher on
> SawStop. They act in a way which is consistent with that. I don't see
> them doing any other sort of table saw demonstrations on Saturday
> morning! I don't begrudge them anything, I'm sure it's a tough
> business to maintain. I could do with out the "selling by fear" sales
> tactic.
Increased profit could be it. One thing to consider however and unless
something has changed in the last year, Woodcraft does not stock SawStop
industrial saws in their stores. They have plenty of the rest but when
I ordered my industrial version I got the distinct impression that
SawStop wanted it that way. My saw came directly from SawStop to
Woodcraft to me only after I ordered. Additionally one cannot order an
industrial version from a dealer that is not in his or her state. You
have to order from a dealer in your state. As far as the Pro and
Contractor versions go you can order them from whom ever yu like.
So with that in mind if buying an industrial SS there is no advantage in
delivery time, all things being equal, over another brand that is sold
by a the same dealer.
On 3/9/2014 8:29 PM, Swingman wrote:
> On 3/9/2014 8:17 PM, Leon wrote:
>
>> Ironically the hydraulic lift mobile base that SS sells for the
>> industrial saw moves the saw with a push of the finger. I have to be
>> careful not to leave my saw unattended in the lifted position. My
>> garage has a slight slope towards the street and it will roll out of the
>> garage on it's own.
>
> Be sure to nudge it in this direction should that happen. I know it's 24
> miles, but I'd hate to see you get hurt on a SawStop trying to push it
> uphill. ;)
>
Ill certainly let you know if I need help getting it back up the ledge. LOL
On 3/9/2014 5:09 PM, [email protected] wrote:
> On Sun, 09 Mar 2014 13:46:49 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet>
> wrote:
>
>> On 3/9/2014 11:13 AM, Swingman wrote:
>>> On 3/9/2014 10:35 AM, [email protected] wrote:
>>>
>>>> There is no such thing as "safe". The only question is how much are
>>>> you willing to pay for each bit of "safety".
>>>
>>> Especially when paying in freedoms:
>>>
>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=phBEhZK5pvY
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> Buying yourself a gun for protection against the possibility of being
>> attacked or robbed is costly. But NOT nearly as costly as losing your
>> right to own that type of protection.
>
> No one is asking you to loose your arm to buy a different brand.
Not sure I follow you here, not talking TS's any more.
>
>> Out lawing guns will only take protection away from the law biding
>> citizens. Criminals, the people we need guns to protect ourselves from,
>> will be the only ones that will still have guns if we lose our rights to
>> own guns.
>
> Forcing SawStop on everyone will also take table saws away from a
> *lot* of people.
Still not following, no one is being forced to buy SawStop but many are
actually loosing and have lost the right to own a fire arm.
>
>> Some people know karate and don't need guns to begin with. These people
>> know that the gun manufacturers are only out to make guns for profit and
>> really don't care about your safety.
>
> Nonsense. Karate is no replacement for a gun, no matter what Bruce
> Lee movies show. I suppose all gun manufacturers all delete safeties
> from their guns because they want them to be dangerous? Umm, get
> real!
>
Sorry, I should have use some kind of emoticon showing my tongue in my
cheek.
On 3/10/2014 9:18 PM, Lew Hodgett wrote:
> Leon wrote:
>
>> Is that right? no. IMHO only the manufacturer of a defective
>> product should be held liable. No one in between.
> -------------------------------------------------------------
> Mom & Pop Industries, capitalized for $1Meg manufactures a
> product that is sold by Walmart.
>
> During use, product fails and kills user.
>
> Who do you think Larry the Lawyer is going to sue?
>
> Lew
>
>
>
Difficult to say exactly, probably not Walmart because most any one
knows they have the big guns to defend themselves. If mom and pop sold
to Bubba's dollar store, he would be in the attorney's sites. It would
all be about the easiest target. It does not matter if the attorney has
any chance of winning because any one he goes after is going to have the
expense of defending himself.
When you are involved with a product that has any conceivable potential
of causing harm you better be prepared to defend yourself.
On 3/10/2014 8:37 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> On 3/10/2014 5:24 PM, Mike Marlow wrote:
>> Leon wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Yes it is BUT many bars have been held liable for over serving
>>> customers that were involved in an accident. The bar did not make
>>> the spirits and they did not make the customer drink the drink....
>>>
>>
>> Yes, but that's quite a bit different.
>>
>
> Is it? When I bought my Delta saw, the salesman gave me a 15 minute
> lesson in its operation and safety. If I went home and cut my hand off
> it would be easy to blame him for not giving mr a proper lesson.
Exactly and whether you win the case against him or not he is going to
have to spend money to defend himself. IMHO better to have a product
liability insurance contract to act as a stop gap measure to begin with.
On 3/9/2014 5:26 PM, Leon wrote:
>
> It is a consensus. Most all TS reports, with the SawStop involved,
> most always place the SawStop as a top quality machine.
>
>
> Simply the arbor/trunnion assembly is quite HD on all models when
> compared to the competition.
I'm part of the consensus.
I don't envision myself ever getting a new tablesaw, but if I did, it
would be SawStop. Well made tool and the safety is a bonus.
That said, if I ever opened a hot dog cart, I'd cut them with a knife as
the SawStop would be too time consuming for that operation.
On 3/9/2014 7:52 PM, Bill wrote:
> Leon wrote:
>> On 3/9/2014 7:06 PM, Max wrote:
>>> On 3/9/2014 3:26 PM, Leon wrote:
>>>> On 3/9/2014 2:13 PM, Max wrote:
>>>>> On 3/9/2014 10:28 AM, [email protected] wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> some snip...but..
>>>>>
>>>>>> The SawStop mechanism DOES NOT double the price of the saw. It
>>>>>> doesn't
>>>>>> even come close. The SawStop tablesaw itself is a well made, very
>>>>>> decent operating tablesaw with top notch fit and finish.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> There's a number of regular $3000 tablesaws on the market and the
>>>>>> SawStop is as good if not better than all of them.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> And that's a consensus or just an opinion. ;-)
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> It is a consensus. Most all TS reports, with the SawStop involved,
>>>> most always place the SawStop as a top quality machine.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Simply the arbor/trunnion assembly is quite HD on all models when
>>>> compared to the competition.
>>>
>>> If it's a consensus how do other manufacturers manage to stay in
>>> business?
>>
>>
>> That is kind of a jerk knee question. A bit of research would provide
>> those answers.
>>
>> But,
>>
>> Delta by a thread. They are but a small fraction in size and in
>> offerings compared to what they offered 5~8 years ago.
>>
>> Have you actually asked a store that sells SawStop how the SS units
>> sell compared to the other brands?
>
> My local Woodcraft store says nobody buys anything else. I don't
> believe them.
>
You may have been taking them a bit too literally. ;~) More
believable, my Woodcraft says that SawStop out sells all the other
brands combined. Then again Woodcraft is pricey and their prime target
customer may be willing to spend more for something that they want.
When I was shopping and ready to pull the trigger on the industrial SS I
was looking at the unit in the store shop. Another customer was
considering the same industrial SS. Mass is always a good thing on a
quality saw, less vibration. I told the guy to lift the right extension
table. It would not budge with out considerable effort. He bought the
saw. This particular saw weighs just shy of 700lbs with the 52" fence.
Ironically the hydraulic lift mobile base that SS sells for the
industrial saw moves the saw with a push of the finger. I have to be
careful not to leave my saw unattended in the lifted position. My
garage has a slight slope towards the street and it will roll out of the
garage on it's own.
On 3/10/2014 8:48 PM, Bill wrote:
> Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>> On 3/10/2014 5:24 PM, Mike Marlow wrote:
>>> Leon wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Yes it is BUT many bars have been held liable for over serving
>>>> customers that were involved in an accident. The bar did not make
>>>> the spirits and they did not make the customer drink the drink....
>>>>
>>>
>>> Yes, but that's quite a bit different.
>>>
>>
>> Is it? When I bought my Delta saw, the salesman gave me a 15 minute
>> lesson in its operation and safety. If I went home and cut my hand
>> off it would be easy to blame him for not giving mr a proper lesson.
>
> There must be a precedent for these issues. Many woodworking books
> indicate they are not responsible for any accidents, etc. But a book IS
> a form of instruction. Once a salesman myself, I can tell you that
> sellers to not always understand what they are selling. There is a price
> on each item, and we were agents willing to trade the items for cash! : )
>
> How about the case of a fishing tackle shop that sells some fresh
> night-crawlers they got from someone else, that sells some to a family.
> The family goes fishing and one of the kids eats a green night crawler
> and gets sick and dies due to the fact that green night crawlers have
> unknown nutritional content. Question: Does that open a new can of
> worms? Should there have been a warning label? : )
>
>
In California there should have been a warning label. If you think that
is crazy, I'm with you, but almost anything you buy in California now
has some kind of cancer warning label including my yard sprinkler and
hose fittings.
This discussion is not so much about right or wrong so much as can you
afford to defend yourself if you don't have liability insurance.
On 3/10/2014 8:11 PM, Bill wrote:
> Leon wrote:
>> On 3/10/2014 5:10 PM, Bill wrote:
>>> Mike Marlow wrote:
>>>> Leon wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Yes it is BUT many bars have been held liable for over serving
>>>>> customers that were involved in an accident. The bar did not make
>>>>> the spirits and they did not make the customer drink the drink....
>>>>>
>>>> Yes, but that's quite a bit different.
>>>
>>> I agree. I doubt that even Leon even believes it at this point.
>>>
>> What I believe and what I think is right are two different things.
>>
>> I believe that it is not beyond a possibility that if you are in any
>> way involved or associated with any form of delivery of a product that
>> may at any time cause harm to the end user that an ambulance chaser
>> has you on his radar.
>
> The key detail is that you would have to prove "negligence". Is
> it the employee's jobs to judge the safety of all of the products on the
> shelf? Answer: No.
> Now if they sold a saw with a known arbor problem that would be
> different. Just my opinion.
The key is, it is going to cost you to defend yourself right or wrong.
Letting an insurance company take care of that is probably going to be
less expensive than having an attorney do to that for you.
On 3/10/2014 12:16 PM, Mike Marlow wrote:
> Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>> On 3/10/2014 12:27 AM, Leon wrote:
>>> On 3/9/2014 9:20 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>>>> On 3/9/2014 8:52 PM, Bill wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> Have you actually asked a store that sells SawStop how the SS
>>>>>> units sell compared to the other brands?
>>>>>
>>>>> My local Woodcraft store says nobody buys anything else. I don't
>>>>> believe them.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> They don't even list Delta on their website, but lots of SawStop.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Retail 101, you sell and stock to meet demand.
>>
>> Possibly another economic factor too. Lawyers tend to drag everyone
>> into the suits that has loose change in their pockets. "Woodcraft
>> knowingly sold this XYZ brand to my client knowing he could cut his
>> penis off if he jumped on top of the saw"
>
> I don't buy that one. I admit that I do not follow this stuff, but it seems
> to me that the lawsuits that have been filed and won were against the
> manufacturer and not against the retailers. It seems to me that retailers
> are not being held accountable in the manner that you suggest.
>
While that is logical, only going after the manufacturer and not the
retailer, even back in the 80's an AC/Delco wholesaler, that I was the
GM for, had liability insurance in case there was a law suite from a
failed part that we sold to a dealer. We installed nothing. Especially
today a lawyer is going to go after who ever he can to win a case.
On 3/10/2014 10:28 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> On 3/10/2014 12:27 AM, Leon wrote:
>> On 3/9/2014 9:20 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>>> On 3/9/2014 8:52 PM, Bill wrote:
>>>
>>>>> Have you actually asked a store that sells SawStop how the SS units
>>>>> sell compared to the other brands?
>>>>
>>>> My local Woodcraft store says nobody buys anything else. I don't
>>>> believe them.
>>>>
>>>
>>> They don't even list Delta on their website, but lots of SawStop.
>>>
>>
>> Retail 101, you sell and stock to meet demand.
>
> Possibly another economic factor too. Lawyers tend to drag everyone
> into the suits that has loose change in their pockets. "Woodcraft
> knowingly sold this XYZ brand to my client knowing he could cut his
> penis off if he jumped on top of the saw"
Yes that could explain why they are pushing that particular product but
I'm sure that you could still buy any brand that they carry and or have
a relationship with if the customer wanted that. Either way the
customer is getting a quality product if he is buying SawStop. It is
not like they are pushing some thing like what you would find at Harbor
Freight or Sears as their line of preference.
"Leon" <lcb11211@swbelldotnet> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On 3/10/2014 5:10 PM, Bill wrote:
>> Mike Marlow wrote:
>>> Leon wrote:
>>>
>>>> Yes it is BUT many bars have been held liable for over serving
>>>> customers that were involved in an accident. The bar did not make
>>>> the spirits and they did not make the customer drink the drink....
>>>>
>>> Yes, but that's quite a bit different.
>>
>> I agree. I doubt that even Leon even believes it at this point.
>>
> What I believe and what I think is right are two different things.
>
> I believe that it is not beyond a possibility that if you are in any way
> involved or associated with any form of delivery of a product that may at
> any time cause harm to the end user that an ambulance chaser has you on
> his radar.
>
> Is that right? no. IMHO only the manufacturer of a defective product
> should be held liable. No one in between.
In the case of the bar I believe the point of contention is that said
bar continued to serve alcohol to someone who was [obviously?] inebriated.
I don't believe it stops with bars or clubs that sell alcohol. I know of a
case where alcohol was served to under aged kids some of which, having left
that party, were involved in an auto accident resulting in fatalities. Home
owners/parents were indeed sued.
Dave in SoTex
On 3/9/2014 4:45 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> On 3/9/2014 5:26 PM, Leon wrote:
>
>>
>> It is a consensus. Most all TS reports, with the SawStop involved,
>> most always place the SawStop as a top quality machine.
>>
>>
>> Simply the arbor/trunnion assembly is quite HD on all models when
>> compared to the competition.
>
> I'm part of the consensus.
> I don't envision myself ever getting a new tablesaw, but if I did, it
> would be SawStop. Well made tool and the safety is a bonus.
>
> That said, if I ever opened a hot dog cart, I'd cut them with a knife as
> the SawStop would be too time consuming for that operation.
And too expensive. LOL
On 3/10/2014 2:14 PM, Bill wrote:
> Mike Marlow wrote:
>> Leon wrote:
>>> On 3/10/2014 12:16 PM, Mike Marlow wrote:
>>>> Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>>>>> On 3/10/2014 12:27 AM, Leon wrote:
>>>>>> On 3/9/2014 9:20 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>>>>>>> On 3/9/2014 8:52 PM, Bill wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Have you actually asked a store that sells SawStop how the SS
>>>>>>>>> units sell compared to the other brands?
>>>>>>>> My local Woodcraft store says nobody buys anything else. I don't
>>>>>>>> believe them.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> They don't even list Delta on their website, but lots of SawStop.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Retail 101, you sell and stock to meet demand.
>>>>> Possibly another economic factor too. Lawyers tend to drag everyone
>>>>> into the suits that has loose change in their pockets. "Woodcraft
>>>>> knowingly sold this XYZ brand to my client knowing he could cut his
>>>>> penis off if he jumped on top of the saw"
>>>> I don't buy that one. I admit that I do not follow this stuff, but
>>>> it seems to me that the lawsuits that have been filed and won were
>>>> against the manufacturer and not against the retailers. It seems to
>>>> me that retailers are not being held accountable in the manner that
>>>> you suggest.
>>>
>>> While that is logical, only going after the manufacturer and not the
>>> retailer, even back in the 80's an AC/Delco wholesaler, that I was the
>>> GM for, had liability insurance in case there was a law suite from a
>>> failed part that we sold to a dealer. We installed nothing. Especially
>>> today a lawyer is going to go after who ever he can to win
>>> a case.
>> I do understand that but my only point was that the cases to date have
>> not
>> reflected the retailer being sued.
>
> It is like suing Speedway (or equivalent service station) for selling
> cigarettes.
>
>>
>
Yes it is BUT many bars have been held liable for over serving customers
that were involved in an accident. The bar did not make the spirits and
they did not make the customer drink the drink....
In this day and age, you never know who is coming after you.
On 3/10/2014 10:19 PM, Max wrote:
> On 3/10/2014 7:37 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>> On 3/10/2014 5:24 PM, Mike Marlow wrote:
>>> Leon wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Yes it is BUT many bars have been held liable for over serving
>>>> customers that were involved in an accident. The bar did not make
>>>> the spirits and they did not make the customer drink the drink....
>>>>
>>>
>>> Yes, but that's quite a bit different.
>>>
>>
>> Is it? When I bought my Delta saw, the salesman gave me a 15 minute
>> lesson in its operation and safety. If I went home and cut my hand off
>> it would be easy to blame him for not giving mr a proper lesson.
>
> I can see it now; If that happens then soon salespersons will be asking
> customers to sign a release certifying that they are completely
> satisfied that the salesperson gave a complete and thorough explanation
> of all phases of operation including any potential danger or possible
> accident that might occur during said customers ownership.....
> How about driving lessons any time you buy a car?
> Fracking lawyers...
> LOL.
>
>
>
Exactly, but in mind that most disclaimers are simply a way to deceive
the customer of his rights. Most often signed disclaimers only show
that you attempted to educate the customer on the dangers. Seldom does
the disclaimer hold up in court as it does not legally trump a written law.
On Sun, 09 Mar 2014 12:17:34 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>>I don't even have a workshop. All of my woodworking is limited to the
>>workbench in my living room. But, if I did have a workshop, I'd
>>seriously consider a SawStop or a sliding table panel saw. That being
>>said, my needs are different than the average woodworker.
>So you admit that it's not all that cut-and-dried; there *is* a
>decision to be made.
There's always a decision to be made. And, you've chosen to ignore my
statement that my situation when using a tablesaw is different than
most.
I do however question your comparison ridiculous comparisons as to
costs.
> Sure, but not if I had to pay twice as much for the car with one.
>Yes. No. Neither, if I had to pay twice as much for the house.
The SawStop mechanism DOES NOT double the price of the saw. It doesn't
even come close. The SawStop tablesaw itself is a well made, very
decent operating tablesaw with top notch fit and finish.
There's a number of regular $3000 tablesaws on the market and the
SawStop is as good if not better than all of them.
On Mon, 10 Mar 2014 20:36:41 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>The cost was obviously more than the makers thought it was worth. The
>numbers thrown around were way out of line.
In your opinion which is almost always crap;
>The proof is in the (empty bowl of) pudding.
>Gass' power play with the FTC tells a lot.
As usual, your emotions and your senility rule you.
On Thu, 13 Mar 2014 22:38:55 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>On Thu, 13 Mar 2014 20:43:33 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>>Keep it up. There may still be someone out there who doesn't know
>>what an ass you are.
>
>Just have to keep it going don't you? I replied to Swingman half
>jokingly and you figured you had to jump in with another hit.
You just prove what a black pot you are. Keep it up.
>You truly are an emotionally driven, senile old fool aren't you?
You're too stupid to read so no one will expect you to think.
On Thu, 13 Mar 2014 19:45:47 -0500, Swingman <[email protected]> wrote:
>On 3/13/2014 7:43 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>> On Thu, 13 Mar 2014 08:41:23 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, 13 Mar 2014 06:07:04 -0500, Swingman <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> EOT?
>>>
>>> Not likely!
>>
>> Keep it up. There may still be someone out there who doesn't know
>> what an ass you are.
>
>Except that wasn't me ...
??? I was answering the nothing's post.
On Sun, 9 Mar 2014 17:31:51 -0700, "Lew Hodgett"
<[email protected]> wrote:
>RE: Subject
>
>As soon as the insurance companies determine that customers who
>use a SawStop tablesaw have lower injury payouts, this discussion
>will be moot.
>
Oh, good grief!
On 3/11/2014 11:58 AM, [email protected] wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Mar 2014 12:44:40 -0400, FrozenNorth
>> Old tank was nearly 60 years old, I put in a new tank, double walled
>> with a float in between, first tank leaks, float rises and I know I have
>> to get another tank. Just pass on the insurance.
>
> Unfortunately, that is not an option in many instances. Many or most
> businesses have to have insurance(s) to operate.
>
And or if they have a mortgage on that property. Lenders do not let you
go without protection for their investments.
They will in a heart beat buy the insurance for you and add it into your
escrow payments and not give a second thought to what insurance rates
you will be paying.
On 3/11/2014 12:02 PM, FrozenNorth wrote:
> On 3/11/2014 12:58 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>> On Tue, 11 Mar 2014 12:44:40 -0400, FrozenNorth
>>> Old tank was nearly 60 years old, I put in a new tank, double walled
>>> with a float in between, first tank leaks, float rises and I know I have
>>> to get another tank. Just pass on the insurance.
>>
>> Unfortunately, that is not an option in many instances. Many or most
>> businesses have to have insurance(s) to operate.
>>
> Yep, but I just passed on the oil tank coverage, still covered for all
> the other usual stuff.
>
A serious question here. What if the tank leaks and causes a fire that
damages the rest of the house? will the rest of the house be covered
then? I think I would make darn sure that you are OK given the fact
that the tank is no longer insured.
On 3/11/2014 1:10 PM, Mike Marlow wrote:
> Leon wrote:
>> On 3/11/2014 11:58 AM, [email protected] wrote:
>>> On Tue, 11 Mar 2014 12:44:40 -0400, FrozenNorth
>>>> Old tank was nearly 60 years old, I put in a new tank, double walled
>>>> with a float in between, first tank leaks, float rises and I know I
>>>> have to get another tank. Just pass on the insurance.
>>>
>>> Unfortunately, that is not an option in many instances. Many or most
>>> businesses have to have insurance(s) to operate.
>>>
>>
>> And or if they have a mortgage on that property. Lenders do not let
>> you go without protection for their investments.
>> They will in a heart beat buy the insurance for you and add it into
>> your escrow payments and not give a second thought to what insurance
>> rates you will be paying.
>
> This whole conversation is getting way out of hand. Yes - Leon is right in
> some respects, but not in total. Banks do not unilaterly just purchase
> insurance that they think you need or even that insurance companys are
> pushing. It really pays to talk to people who really know and not pay any
> attention to internet newsgroup advice.
>
Well what i said is true, a lender is going to require that you have
insurance to protect their investment.
Also true is that they don't care from whom they get it and or pay for
it if you let your policy lapse.
This is most likely and actually almost happened to me. I learned early
on that escrow is a estimation of what annual costs are going to be.
Any thing that can threaten to diminish the lenders interest will be
covered in the escrow account. Unfortunately the escrow account was/is
often over estimated.
Because I got tired of my payments going up back in the 80's because of
over estimations I elected to buy the insurance up front and send proof
to the lender. They accepted that and reduced my escrow to only cover
taxes. Some how or another the following year the insurance company
that had been covering my house did not verify that I was no longer a
customer and told the lender that my policy had expired, because the
lender quit paying the insurance, of course. The lender upped my escrow
again to pay for the insurance from the company that they normally used.
I had to go through the ordeal again and once again they reduced the
escrow. That never happened again after I told my insurance company to
every year send proof of coverage to my lender.
During this period of getting the issue resolved the lender did indicate
that they will insure any property that they have an interest in
themselves and pass the cost on to the borrower. It is part of the
mortgage agreement.
On Tue, 11 Mar 2014 12:44:40 -0400, FrozenNorth
>Old tank was nearly 60 years old, I put in a new tank, double walled
>with a float in between, first tank leaks, float rises and I know I have
>to get another tank. Just pass on the insurance.
Unfortunately, that is not an option in many instances. Many or most
businesses have to have insurance(s) to operate.
On 3/11/2014 12:58 PM, [email protected] wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Mar 2014 12:44:40 -0400, FrozenNorth
>> Old tank was nearly 60 years old, I put in a new tank, double walled
>> with a float in between, first tank leaks, float rises and I know I have
>> to get another tank. Just pass on the insurance.
>
> Unfortunately, that is not an option in many instances. Many or most
> businesses have to have insurance(s) to operate.
>
Yep, but I just passed on the oil tank coverage, still covered for all
the other usual stuff.
--
Froz...
The system will be down for 10 days for preventive maintenance.
On 3/11/2014 1:13 PM, Leon wrote:
> On 3/11/2014 12:02 PM, FrozenNorth wrote:
>> On 3/11/2014 12:58 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>>> On Tue, 11 Mar 2014 12:44:40 -0400, FrozenNorth
>>>> Old tank was nearly 60 years old, I put in a new tank, double walled
>>>> with a float in between, first tank leaks, float rises and I know I
>>>> have
>>>> to get another tank. Just pass on the insurance.
>>>
>>> Unfortunately, that is not an option in many instances. Many or most
>>> businesses have to have insurance(s) to operate.
>>>
>> Yep, but I just passed on the oil tank coverage, still covered for all
>> the other usual stuff.
>>
>
>
> A serious question here. What if the tank leaks and causes a fire that
> damages the rest of the house? will the rest of the house be covered
> then? I think I would make darn sure that you are OK given the fact
> that the tank is no longer insured.
I really do not see that happening, no idea what could spark it,
electrical is high up on the walls, and that would be a catastrophic
tank failure in a double walled tank, just do not see it happening.
--
Froz...
The system will be down for 10 days for preventive maintenance.
On 3/11/2014 1:10 PM, Leon wrote:
> On 3/11/2014 11:58 AM, [email protected] wrote:
>> On Tue, 11 Mar 2014 12:44:40 -0400, FrozenNorth
>>> Old tank was nearly 60 years old, I put in a new tank, double walled
>>> with a float in between, first tank leaks, float rises and I know I have
>>> to get another tank. Just pass on the insurance.
>>
>> Unfortunately, that is not an option in many instances. Many or most
>> businesses have to have insurance(s) to operate.
>>
>
> And or if they have a mortgage on that property. Lenders do not let you
> go without protection for their investments.
> They will in a heart beat buy the insurance for you and add it into your
> escrow payments and not give a second thought to what insurance rates
> you will be paying.
No mortgage, involved in my case.
--
Froz...
The system will be down for 10 days for preventive maintenance.
[email protected] wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Mar 2014 12:44:40 -0400, FrozenNorth
>> Old tank was nearly 60 years old, I put in a new tank, double walled
>> with a float in between, first tank leaks, float rises and I know I
>> have to get another tank. Just pass on the insurance.
>
> Unfortunately, that is not an option in many instances. Many or most
> businesses have to have insurance(s) to operate.
Very true in what you say Dave, but how does that correlate to the original
post? If what you are saying is that the insurance industry is getting
creative in the ways they can up premiums - then I agree. Of course, it
does remain that there is a difference in those regulations in Canada
compared to the US.
--
-Mike-
[email protected]
Leon wrote:
> On 3/11/2014 12:02 PM, FrozenNorth wrote:
>> On 3/11/2014 12:58 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>>> On Tue, 11 Mar 2014 12:44:40 -0400, FrozenNorth
>>>> Old tank was nearly 60 years old, I put in a new tank, double
>>>> walled with a float in between, first tank leaks, float rises and
>>>> I know I have to get another tank. Just pass on the insurance.
>>>
>>> Unfortunately, that is not an option in many instances. Many or most
>>> businesses have to have insurance(s) to operate.
>>>
>> Yep, but I just passed on the oil tank coverage, still covered for
>> all the other usual stuff.
>>
>
>
> A serious question here. What if the tank leaks and causes a fire
> that damages the rest of the house? will the rest of the house be
> covered then? I think I would make darn sure that you are OK given
> the fact that the tank is no longer insured.
Don't know about Canadian law, but here in NY - he'd be covered for the loss
of the house. What he would not be covered for is any costs if the tank
simply leaked and caused damages such as to surrounding things like a floor,
or other contents. It pays to understand what your insurance is really
covering. Too many questions asked here that are made obvious by looking at
one's policy.
--
-Mike-
[email protected]
Leon wrote:
> On 3/11/2014 11:58 AM, [email protected] wrote:
>> On Tue, 11 Mar 2014 12:44:40 -0400, FrozenNorth
>>> Old tank was nearly 60 years old, I put in a new tank, double walled
>>> with a float in between, first tank leaks, float rises and I know I
>>> have to get another tank. Just pass on the insurance.
>>
>> Unfortunately, that is not an option in many instances. Many or most
>> businesses have to have insurance(s) to operate.
>>
>
> And or if they have a mortgage on that property. Lenders do not let
> you go without protection for their investments.
> They will in a heart beat buy the insurance for you and add it into
> your escrow payments and not give a second thought to what insurance
> rates you will be paying.
This whole conversation is getting way out of hand. Yes - Leon is right in
some respects, but not in total. Banks do not unilaterly just purchase
insurance that they think you need or even that insurance companys are
pushing. It really pays to talk to people who really know and not pay any
attention to internet newsgroup advice.
--
-Mike-
[email protected]
Mike Marlow wrote:
> Leon wrote:
>> On 3/11/2014 12:02 PM, FrozenNorth wrote:
>>> On 3/11/2014 12:58 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 11 Mar 2014 12:44:40 -0400, FrozenNorth
>>>>> Old tank was nearly 60 years old, I put in a new tank, double
>>>>> walled with a float in between, first tank leaks, float rises and
>>>>> I know I have to get another tank. Just pass on the insurance.
>>>>
>>>> Unfortunately, that is not an option in many instances. Many or
>>>> most businesses have to have insurance(s) to operate.
>>>>
>>> Yep, but I just passed on the oil tank coverage, still covered for
>>> all the other usual stuff.
>>>
>>
>>
>> A serious question here. What if the tank leaks and causes a fire
>> that damages the rest of the house? will the rest of the house be
>> covered then? I think I would make darn sure that you are OK given
>> the fact that the tank is no longer insured.
>
> Don't know about Canadian law, but here in NY - he'd be covered for
> the loss of the house. What he would not be covered for is any costs
> if the tank simply leaked and caused damages such as to surrounding
> things like a floor, or other contents. It pays to understand what
> your insurance is really covering. Too many questions asked here
> that are made obvious by looking at one's policy.
Ooops... just talked to a friend who is in the insurance industry. In NY,
if they take your policy, you are covered. So my comment above that if the
tank leaked and caused damages... is incorrect. It is covered by law in NY.
Apparently, in most of the US. Do not know about Canada.
--
-Mike-
[email protected]
On 3/11/2014 8:09 AM, Leon wrote:
> Today seeing how many of the manufacturers are really struggling to stay
> afloat I can see how the possibility of buying in now would be a
> struggle. To me it looks like the manufacturers put too much emphasis
> on cost 10 or so years ago vs. investing in their futures. If that was
> the case, most probably made a bad business decision and they appear to
> be falling farther behind. And given the talk about the technology
> being too expensive to buy for the consumer it appears that the consumer
> is not as concerned with the cost of the SawStop as many had thought. I
> seriously doubt that the SawStop technology will ever be mandated. The
> SawStop seems to be a complete success story and the direction that
> SawStop is going will lead the industry. I believe that the vast
> majority of the people will want a saw with this technology.
>
It will still be a cost-benefit decision. Those who can afford $1000
*maximum* for a saw will be limited in what they choose.
A business, however, will have a different perspective.
On 3/10/2014 8:36 PM, [email protected] wrote:
> On Sun, 9 Mar 2014 17:31:51 -0700, "Lew Hodgett"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> RE: Subject
>>
>> As soon as the insurance companies determine that customers who
>> use a SawStop tablesaw have lower injury payouts, this discussion
>> will be moot.
>>
> Oh, good grief!
>
Our workman's comp carrier is recommending SawStop and may require them
in the future
On Tue, 11 Mar 2014 14:18:51 -0400, FrozenNorth
>I called the insurance company told them what was now installed, and
>they had no clue what I was talking about. For that tank to fail, I
>would have to take up basement spear tossing as a hobby, or the rest of
>the house crashed down on it.
Many of those who eschew the idea of a SawStop, feel the same way as
you do about your oil tank. Agreed, one maybe more likely to have a
tablesaw accident than an oil tank failing catastrophically, but
accident's can and do happen. The only way to deal with it is to be as
logical and unemotional about it as possible, and then make your
choice. It sounds like you've done that with your oil tank.
[email protected] wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Mar 2014 14:00:10 -0400, "Mike Marlow"
>> Very true in what you say Dave, but how does that correlate to the
>> original post?
>
> Which original post are you referring to?
UNCLE. Too many snips, and I'm too lazy to go back to look it all up.
--
-Mike-
[email protected]
[email protected] wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Mar 2014 14:18:51 -0400, FrozenNorth
>> I called the insurance company told them what was now installed, and
>> they had no clue what I was talking about. For that tank to fail, I
>> would have to take up basement spear tossing as a hobby, or the rest
>> of the house crashed down on it.
>
> Many of those who eschew the idea of a SawStop, feel the same way as
> you do about your oil tank. Agreed, one maybe more likely to have a
> tablesaw accident than an oil tank failing catastrophically, but
> accident's can and do happen. The only way to deal with it is to be as
> logical and unemotional about it as possible, and then make your
> choice. It sounds like you've done that with your oil tank.
So Dave - just what is "as logical and unemotional as possible"? Sorry guy,
but I am going to accuse you of being just the opposite of that in your
reasoning. Not trying to start an argument here, but where is the logical
and unemotional evidence behind that statement?
--
-Mike-
[email protected]
On 3/11/2014 2:25 AM, [email protected] wrote:
> On Mon, 10 Mar 2014 20:36:41 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>> The cost was obviously more than the makers thought it was worth. The
>> numbers thrown around were way out of line.
>
> In your opinion which is almost always crap;
No, I'll agree with him considering the fact that he, in that sentence,
did not indicate that the only cost would be the one to pay Gass. There
are many many other costs to consider short and long term when changing
the design of a product. Given Delta's financial state it may have been
more than they could have afforded to simply change tooling even of Gass
had not charged for the technology. Liability costs and issues probably
came into play given this technology was not proven with the test of time.
Oddly when all of this negotiating was happening I thought the figures
tossed out there to buy the technology was not at all out of line.
Today seeing how many of the manufacturers are really struggling to stay
afloat I can see how the possibility of buying in now would be a
struggle. To me it looks like the manufacturers put too much emphasis
on cost 10 or so years ago vs. investing in their futures. If that was
the case, most probably made a bad business decision and they appear to
be falling farther behind. And given the talk about the technology
being too expensive to buy for the consumer it appears that the consumer
is not as concerned with the cost of the SawStop as many had thought. I
seriously doubt that the SawStop technology will ever be mandated. The
SawStop seems to be a complete success story and the direction that
SawStop is going will lead the industry. I believe that the vast
majority of the people will want a saw with this technology.
On Fri, 14 Mar 2014 12:29:57 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>On Thu, 13 Mar 2014 22:38:55 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 13 Mar 2014 20:43:33 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>>>Keep it up. There may still be someone out there who doesn't know
>>>what an ass you are.
>>
>>Just have to keep it going don't you? I replied to Swingman half
>>jokingly and you figured you had to jump in with another hit.
>
>You just prove what a black pot you are. Keep it up.
>
>>You truly are an emotionally driven, senile old fool aren't you?
>
>You're too stupid to read so no one will expect you to think.
Y'all done till next time?
On 3/11/2014 11:07 AM, Mike Marlow wrote:
> Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>> On 3/11/2014 9:10 AM, Leon wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I can see an insurance company recommending the SawStop but to demand
>>> what equipment you use will probably not fly. Unless laws dictates
>>> such, they too could be found liable in a case where the SawStop
>>> might fail for what ever reason.
>>
>> Most likely they would have the demand in the form of premiums.
>>
>> If you insure with us and you use SawStop (or equal) $X
>> If you keep your old equipment where you took the guards off, $X
>> times 10.
>
> I could see that happening in my own mind but I wonder if they can actually
> do that or not. I know there are areas where they can charge higher
> premiums based on risk - such as the cost to insure a Corvette compared to a
> Honda Civic, but most states regulate the insurance carriers and there are
> (at least some) restrictions on how they do that. Not being well versed in
> the business of insurance, I don't know. There is a lot of misunderstand
> about what insurance companies can do. It's common here to see people state
> that your insurance company can deny a claim because your house burns down
> due to faulty wiring that you installed. Not true at all, but I just don't
> know how far they can really go.
>
Sure they can, my home owners premiums went down and I received, IIRC,
a $250 credit every year for having a metal roof put on my house many
years ago. Often items that are more likely to be more risk or less
risk will affect the price.
But Auto insurance is another matter entirely.
And actually your credit score has more to do with auto insurance
premiums differences between a Corvette and a Civic than Actual risk,
assuming both are owned and insured by the same person.
My son, age 25 at the time and 26 now, was discussing this with his
insurance agent. He owns an 84 Corvette in almost mint condition and an
05 Cavalier. Premium differences between the two are not much. IIRC
the Corvette is less expensive with an antique style policy. His credit
score has more to do with his rates than anything. My son was concerned
about buying a new Lexus and how much his rates would go up. Less than
$25~$40 per year difference by dropping the 9 year old Cavalier and
buying the 2014 Lexus.
As an example he gave the rates for a new Accord for a couple with a
less than desirable credit score. They would have paid about 2.5 time
more for the new Accord policy as my son would for the Lexus policy.
On 3/11/2014 9:10 AM, Leon wrote:
>
>
> I can see an insurance company recommending the SawStop but to demand
> what equipment you use will probably not fly. Unless laws dictates
> such, they too could be found liable in a case where the SawStop might
> fail for what ever reason.
Most likely they would have the demand in the form of premiums.
If you insure with us and you use SawStop (or equal) $X
If you keep your old equipment where you took the guards off, $X times 10.
On 3/11/2014 1:49 PM, Mike Marlow wrote:
> Leon wrote:
>> On 3/11/2014 11:07 AM, Mike Marlow wrote:
>>> Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>>>> On 3/11/2014 9:10 AM, Leon wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I can see an insurance company recommending the SawStop but to
>>>>> demand what equipment you use will probably not fly. Unless laws
>>>>> dictates such, they too could be found liable in a case where the
>>>>> SawStop might fail for what ever reason.
>>>>
>>>> Most likely they would have the demand in the form of premiums.
>>>>
>>>> If you insure with us and you use SawStop (or equal) $X
>>>> If you keep your old equipment where you took the guards off, $X
>>>> times 10.
>>>
>>> I could see that happening in my own mind but I wonder if they can
>>> actually do that or not. I know there are areas where they can
>>> charge higher premiums based on risk - such as the cost to insure a
>>> Corvette compared to a Honda Civic, but most states regulate the
>>> insurance carriers and there are (at least some) restrictions on how
>>> they do that. Not being well versed in the business of insurance, I
>>> don't know. There is a lot of misunderstand about what insurance
>>> companies can do. It's common here to see people state that your
>>> insurance company can deny a claim because your house burns down due
>>> to faulty wiring that you installed. Not true at all, but I just
>>> don't know how far they can really go.
>>
>>
>> Sure they can, my home owners premiums went down and I received,
>> IIRC, a $250 credit every year for having a metal roof put on my
>> house many years ago. Often items that are more likely to be more
>> risk or less risk will affect the price.
>
> Ok - and how did that differ from what I stated above?
I was mostly responding to your first sentence.
I could see that happening in my own mind but I wonder if they can
actually do that or not.
Sorry.
>
>>
>> But Auto insurance is another matter entirely.
>>
>> And actually your credit score has more to do with auto insurance
>> premiums differences between a Corvette and a Civic than Actual risk,
>> assuming both are owned and insured by the same person.
>
> Oh Leon... you have to go back on that one. Look at what you wrote...
> "assuming both are owned and insured by the same person" means that credit
> rating is completely irrelevant.
I meant to indicate that if the Corvette and Civic are both owned and
insured by the same persons the rate would be similar. That could be
similarly expensive or similarly less expensive.
>
>>
>> My son, age 25 at the time and 26 now, was discussing this with his
>> insurance agent. He owns an 84 Corvette in almost mint condition and
>> an 05 Cavalier. Premium differences between the two are not much.
>
> I find that very hard to believe, but maybe things are different down in
> Texas than they are in NY. In NY that would never be the case. The
> Corvette is a much more expensive car to insure based on repair costs.
Again, that is what we thought and it used to be the case here back when
I was in the automotive business. Now of course your driving record
probably still trumps any other indicator. Oddly, now it seems that
your credit rating and, I'm sorry I left this out, where you live in
Texas determines what your premiums are going to be. I was always
surprised since the 90's that when my wife and I bought new vehicles
that our insurance rates never really differed much. Maybe $50 a year.
>
>
>> IIRC the Corvette is less expensive with an antique style policy.
>
> That may be true if it falls withing the classic auto category, but that is
> a category that is not as obvious at it may appear.
>
>> His credit score has more to do with his rates than anything. My son
>> was concerned about buying a new Lexus and how much his rates would
>> go up. Less than $25~$40 per year difference by dropping the 9 year
>> old Cavalier and buying the 2014 Lexus.
>
> I don't know myself, but I would not be surprised if credit score did play
> into things since it seems to play into everything these days. In NY if you
> buy any new car, it is most likely your rates will go up from whatever you
> insured before (unless it was something exotic). Here, you could not step
> from say a Hyundai Sonata to a Lexus without a significant rate increase.
> Hell you can't even step from a 5 year old Sonata to a brand new Sonata
> without a significant rate increase.
That sounds logical but maybe we Texans are much better drivers than you
Yanks' LOL.... But seriously I had an 87 Isuzu Trooper that I bought
when I still worked for the dealer. It had AC and a radio and that was
about it. IIRC it stickered for $14000 or so. Replaced with a 97
Silverado that was pretty much loaded. Stickered for about $25k.
Insurance went up less than $100 a year. I was shocked. Traded that
vehicle in on an 07 Tundra similarly equipped. Stickered way north of
$30k. Insurance went up about $50 per year.
I still have that vehicle and we bought my wife a new 2012 loaded Camry
18 months ago. Our insurance premiums run $822 per year for both.
Just talked to my son, I was wrong about the Corvette. ;~) He pays just
under $300 per year for it and about $900 a year for the Cavalier. The
stipulation with the Corvette is that it has to be over 25 years old and
it cannot be your primary vehicle. You have to own and insure another
vehicle as primary transportation.
Why does he pay more than my wife and I do for two newer vehicles
compared to his older vehicle? Age and location. We live in a
different county than he does, actually his county is next to ours.
Harris county is expensive for all insurance. Our new home, out side of
Harris county, insurance premium is with in $100 per year as our old
home. The new home is valued about 80% more than the old home.
>
> It seems that different states regulate things differently, so we have to be
> careful how much we try to generalize these experiences.
And in our case where in the state you live.
>
>>
>> As an example he gave the rates for a new Accord for a couple with a
>> less than desirable credit score. They would have paid about 2.5 time
>> more for the new Accord policy as my son would for the Lexus policy.
>
> So I just tried the same thing with an on-line insurance offering. I used
> my own information which is a high credit rating. My friend then did the
> very same thing with a miserable credit rating. Premiums are the same.
> Must be a state by state thing.
Must be.
Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> On 3/11/2014 9:10 AM, Leon wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> I can see an insurance company recommending the SawStop but to demand
>> what equipment you use will probably not fly. Unless laws dictates
>> such, they too could be found liable in a case where the SawStop
>> might fail for what ever reason.
>
> Most likely they would have the demand in the form of premiums.
>
> If you insure with us and you use SawStop (or equal) $X
> If you keep your old equipment where you took the guards off, $X
> times 10.
I could see that happening in my own mind but I wonder if they can actually
do that or not. I know there are areas where they can charge higher
premiums based on risk - such as the cost to insure a Corvette compared to a
Honda Civic, but most states regulate the insurance carriers and there are
(at least some) restrictions on how they do that. Not being well versed in
the business of insurance, I don't know. There is a lot of misunderstand
about what insurance companies can do. It's common here to see people state
that your insurance company can deny a claim because your house burns down
due to faulty wiring that you installed. Not true at all, but I just don't
know how far they can really go.
--
-Mike-
[email protected]
Leon wrote:
> On 3/11/2014 11:07 AM, Mike Marlow wrote:
>> Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>>> On 3/11/2014 9:10 AM, Leon wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I can see an insurance company recommending the SawStop but to
>>>> demand what equipment you use will probably not fly. Unless laws
>>>> dictates such, they too could be found liable in a case where the
>>>> SawStop might fail for what ever reason.
>>>
>>> Most likely they would have the demand in the form of premiums.
>>>
>>> If you insure with us and you use SawStop (or equal) $X
>>> If you keep your old equipment where you took the guards off, $X
>>> times 10.
>>
>> I could see that happening in my own mind but I wonder if they can
>> actually do that or not. I know there are areas where they can
>> charge higher premiums based on risk - such as the cost to insure a
>> Corvette compared to a Honda Civic, but most states regulate the
>> insurance carriers and there are (at least some) restrictions on how
>> they do that. Not being well versed in the business of insurance, I
>> don't know. There is a lot of misunderstand about what insurance
>> companies can do. It's common here to see people state that your
>> insurance company can deny a claim because your house burns down due
>> to faulty wiring that you installed. Not true at all, but I just
>> don't know how far they can really go.
>
>
> Sure they can, my home owners premiums went down and I received,
> IIRC, a $250 credit every year for having a metal roof put on my
> house many years ago. Often items that are more likely to be more
> risk or less risk will affect the price.
Ok - and how did that differ from what I stated above?
>
> But Auto insurance is another matter entirely.
>
> And actually your credit score has more to do with auto insurance
> premiums differences between a Corvette and a Civic than Actual risk,
> assuming both are owned and insured by the same person.
Oh Leon... you have to go back on that one. Look at what you wrote...
"assuming both are owned and insured by the same person" means that credit
rating is completely irrelevant.
>
> My son, age 25 at the time and 26 now, was discussing this with his
> insurance agent. He owns an 84 Corvette in almost mint condition and
> an 05 Cavalier. Premium differences between the two are not much.
I find that very hard to believe, but maybe things are different down in
Texas than they are in NY. In NY that would never be the case. The
Corvette is a much more expensive car to insure based on repair costs.
> IIRC the Corvette is less expensive with an antique style policy.
That may be true if it falls withing the classic auto category, but that is
a category that is not as obvious at it may appear.
> His credit score has more to do with his rates than anything. My son
> was concerned about buying a new Lexus and how much his rates would
> go up. Less than $25~$40 per year difference by dropping the 9 year
> old Cavalier and buying the 2014 Lexus.
I don't know myself, but I would not be surprised if credit score did play
into things since it seems to play into everything these days. In NY if you
buy any new car, it is most likely your rates will go up from whatever you
insured before (unless it was something exotic). Here, you could not step
from say a Hyundai Sonata to a Lexus without a significant rate increase.
Hell you can't even step from a 5 year old Sonata to a brand new Sonata
without a significant rate increase.
It seems that different states regulate things differently, so we have to be
careful how much we try to generalize these experiences.
>
> As an example he gave the rates for a new Accord for a couple with a
> less than desirable credit score. They would have paid about 2.5 time
> more for the new Accord policy as my son would for the Lexus policy.
So I just tried the same thing with an on-line insurance offering. I used
my own information which is a high credit rating. My friend then did the
very same thing with a miserable credit rating. Premiums are the same.
Must be a state by state thing.
--
-Mike-
[email protected]
On 3/10/2014 7:48 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> On 3/10/2014 8:36 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>> On Sun, 9 Mar 2014 17:31:51 -0700, "Lew Hodgett"
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> RE: Subject
>>>
>>> As soon as the insurance companies determine that customers who
>>> use a SawStop tablesaw have lower injury payouts, this discussion
>>> will be moot.
>>>
>> Oh, good grief!
>>
>
> Our workman's comp carrier is recommending SawStop and may require them
> in the future
I can see an insurance company recommending the SawStop but to demand
what equipment you use will probably not fly. Unless laws dictates
such, they too could be found liable in a case where the SawStop might
fail for what ever reason.
On 3/11/2014 11:45 AM, Max wrote:
> On 3/11/2014 8:09 AM, Leon wrote:
>
>> Today seeing how many of the manufacturers are really struggling to stay
>> afloat I can see how the possibility of buying in now would be a
>> struggle. To me it looks like the manufacturers put too much emphasis
>> on cost 10 or so years ago vs. investing in their futures. If that was
>> the case, most probably made a bad business decision and they appear to
>> be falling farther behind. And given the talk about the technology
>> being too expensive to buy for the consumer it appears that the consumer
>> is not as concerned with the cost of the SawStop as many had thought. I
>> seriously doubt that the SawStop technology will ever be mandated. The
>> SawStop seems to be a complete success story and the direction that
>> SawStop is going will lead the industry. I believe that the vast
>> majority of the people will want a saw with this technology.
>>
>
> It will still be a cost-benefit decision. Those who can afford $1000
> *maximum* for a saw will be limited in what they choose.
> A business, however, will have a different perspective.
>
>
That is absolutely true but not unique in it's own right. Many people
are not going to be able to afford any saw that they buy regardless of
price and will cut back somewhere else. Unfortunately the economy is
in the shape it is in mostly because a majority of the people bite off
more than they can chew and are absolutely not prepared for a rainy day.
Then there is inflation which makes most every thing go up in price and
very seldom adds any value.
SawStop technology is not unique in driving up prices. The automobile
industry is a prime example of safety costing all of us more.
On 3/9/2014 7:18 PM, Larry Blanchard wrote:
> On Sun, 09 Mar 2014 16:26:43 -0500, Leon wrote:
>
>> Simply the arbor/trunnion assembly is quite HD on all models when
>> compared to the competition.
>
> That's certainly true. It *has* to be heavier to take the shock when/if
> the brake fires.
Exactly and that benefits the user with a better built arbor/trunnion
assembly.
>
> But I worked for a power tool retailer for a few years and had the
> opportunity to examine (and @#$% assemble) several brands and types of
> table saws. I think the cabinet saws from Powermatic, General, and maybe
> even Steel City, are equal or better in quality to the Sawstop.
That could be true but there is a lot of data that indicates SawStop is
a bit ahead. Considering that I was looking at $5k+ saws a year ago I
was looking pretty closely at the innards of each brand. PM, The Euro
Laguna's, Felder, and Hammer were all in the hunt. General would have
been had I been able to easily see one. Steel City may not be around
much longer and I was never really impressed with that brand.
>
> A prospective buyer has to weigh the importance of quality, price, and
> features. Different people will come to different conclusions.
>
That is exactly true. Some people will buy an American or German
product but never again after having the opportunity to use or own a
Japanese product. It is all in how much value you place in safety,
quality, value. etc. Safety is my personal top of the list and is the
leading reason that I recently bought the industrial SS over the Laguna
TS with the scoring blade.
On 3/10/2014 5:24 PM, Mike Marlow wrote:
> Leon wrote:
>
>>
>> Yes it is BUT many bars have been held liable for over serving
>> customers that were involved in an accident. The bar did not make
>> the spirits and they did not make the customer drink the drink....
>>
>
> Yes, but that's quite a bit different.
>
Is it? When I bought my Delta saw, the salesman gave me a 15 minute
lesson in its operation and safety. If I went home and cut my hand off
it would be easy to blame him for not giving mr a proper lesson.
On Sun, 09 Mar 2014 16:26:43 -0500, Leon wrote:
> Simply the arbor/trunnion assembly is quite HD on all models when
> compared to the competition.
That's certainly true. It *has* to be heavier to take the shock when/if
the brake fires.
But I worked for a power tool retailer for a few years and had the
opportunity to examine (and @#$% assemble) several brands and types of
table saws. I think the cabinet saws from Powermatic, General, and maybe
even Steel City, are equal or better in quality to the Sawstop.
A prospective buyer has to weigh the importance of quality, price, and
features. Different people will come to different conclusions.
--
Where have all the flowers gone? Pete Seeger 1919-2014
Leon wrote:
> On 3/9/2014 7:06 PM, Max wrote:
>> On 3/9/2014 3:26 PM, Leon wrote:
>>> On 3/9/2014 2:13 PM, Max wrote:
>>>> On 3/9/2014 10:28 AM, [email protected] wrote:
>>>>
>>>> some snip...but..
>>>>
>>>>> The SawStop mechanism DOES NOT double the price of the saw. It
>>>>> doesn't
>>>>> even come close. The SawStop tablesaw itself is a well made, very
>>>>> decent operating tablesaw with top notch fit and finish.
>>>>>
>>>>> There's a number of regular $3000 tablesaws on the market and the
>>>>> SawStop is as good if not better than all of them.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> And that's a consensus or just an opinion. ;-)
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> It is a consensus. Most all TS reports, with the SawStop involved,
>>> most always place the SawStop as a top quality machine.
>>>
>>>
>>> Simply the arbor/trunnion assembly is quite HD on all models when
>>> compared to the competition.
>>
>> If it's a consensus how do other manufacturers manage to stay in
>> business?
>
>
> That is kind of a jerk knee question. A bit of research would provide
> those answers.
>
> But,
>
> Delta by a thread. They are but a small fraction in size and in
> offerings compared to what they offered 5~8 years ago.
>
> Have you actually asked a store that sells SawStop how the SS units
> sell compared to the other brands?
My local Woodcraft store says nobody buys anything else. I don't
believe them.
>
>
>
>
Leon wrote:
> On 3/9/2014 7:52 PM, Bill wrote:
>> Leon wrote:
>>> On 3/9/2014 7:06 PM, Max wrote:
>>>> On 3/9/2014 3:26 PM, Leon wrote:
>>>>> On 3/9/2014 2:13 PM, Max wrote:
>>>>>> On 3/9/2014 10:28 AM, [email protected] wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> some snip...but..
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The SawStop mechanism DOES NOT double the price of the saw. It
>>>>>>> doesn't
>>>>>>> even come close. The SawStop tablesaw itself is a well made, very
>>>>>>> decent operating tablesaw with top notch fit and finish.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> There's a number of regular $3000 tablesaws on the market and the
>>>>>>> SawStop is as good if not better than all of them.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And that's a consensus or just an opinion. ;-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> It is a consensus. Most all TS reports, with the SawStop involved,
>>>>> most always place the SawStop as a top quality machine.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Simply the arbor/trunnion assembly is quite HD on all models when
>>>>> compared to the competition.
>>>>
>>>> If it's a consensus how do other manufacturers manage to stay in
>>>> business?
>>>
>>>
>>> That is kind of a jerk knee question. A bit of research would provide
>>> those answers.
>>>
>>> But,
>>>
>>> Delta by a thread. They are but a small fraction in size and in
>>> offerings compared to what they offered 5~8 years ago.
>>>
>>> Have you actually asked a store that sells SawStop how the SS units
>>> sell compared to the other brands?
>>
>> My local Woodcraft store says nobody buys anything else. I don't
>> believe them.
>>
>
> You may have been taking them a bit too literally. ;~) More
> believable, my Woodcraft says that SawStop out sells all the other
> brands combined.
They eventually moved most of the other saws out of the place. My
thinking is that their commissions and markups are much higher on
SawStop. They act in a way which is consistent with that. I don't see
them doing any other sort of table saw demonstrations on Saturday
morning! I don't begrudge them anything, I'm sure it's a tough
business to maintain. I could do with out the "selling by fear" sales
tactic.
Bill
> Then again Woodcraft is pricey and their prime target customer may be
> willing to spend more for something that they want.
>
> When I was shopping and ready to pull the trigger on the industrial SS
> I was looking at the unit in the store shop. Another customer was
> considering the same industrial SS. Mass is always a good thing on a
> quality saw, less vibration. I told the guy to lift the right
> extension table. It would not budge with out considerable effort. He
> bought the saw. This particular saw weighs just shy of 700lbs with
> the 52" fence. Ironically the hydraulic lift mobile base that SS
> sells for the industrial saw moves the saw with a push of the finger.
> I have to be careful not to leave my saw unattended in the lifted
> position. My garage has a slight slope towards the street and it will
> roll out of the garage on it's own.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Max wrote:
> On 3/9/2014 6:53 PM, Leon wrote:
>> On 3/9/2014 7:06 PM, Max wrote:
>>> On 3/9/2014 3:26 PM, Leon wrote:
>>>> On 3/9/2014 2:13 PM, Max wrote:
>>>>> On 3/9/2014 10:28 AM, [email protected] wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> some snip...but..
>>>>>
>>>>>> The SawStop mechanism DOES NOT double the price of the saw. It
>>>>>> doesn't
>>>>>> even come close. The SawStop tablesaw itself is a well made, very
>>>>>> decent operating tablesaw with top notch fit and finish.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> There's a number of regular $3000 tablesaws on the market and the
>>>>>> SawStop is as good if not better than all of them.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> And that's a consensus or just an opinion. ;-)
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> It is a consensus. Most all TS reports, with the SawStop involved,
>>>> most always place the SawStop as a top quality machine.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Simply the arbor/trunnion assembly is quite HD on all models when
>>>> compared to the competition.
>>>
>>> If it's a consensus how do other manufacturers manage to stay in
>>> business?
>>
>>
>> That is kind of a jerk knee question. A bit of research would provide
>> those answers.
>>
>> But,
>>
>> Delta by a thread. They are but a small fraction in size and in
>> offerings compared to what they offered 5~8 years ago.
>>
>> Have you actually asked a store that sells SawStop how the SS units sell
>> compared to the other brands?
>>
>
> No, Leon, I haven't. As I've said, I'm not questioning the quality of
> the SawStop but rather the "consensus".
> And not the consensus of just the "wreck". There must be a market for
> the other "quality" table saws or the SawStop would put its
> competitors out of business. (and not saying that won't happen either)
> ;-)
>
> The last time this issue surfaced I mentioned that *if* I bought one
> the first time that brake busted my saw and blade I would trade it for
> a saw without the feature. In other words there's more to the equation
> than saving a finger. For me.
>
If you review the owners manual (which I did), you'll find there's
plenty more to the equation.
On Sun, 09 Mar 2014 22:20:10 -0400, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> On 3/9/2014 8:52 PM, Bill wrote:
>
>>> Have you actually asked a store that sells SawStop how the SS units
>>> sell compared to the other brands?
>>
>> My local Woodcraft store says nobody buys anything else. I don't
>> believe them.
>>
>>
> They don't even list Delta on their website, but lots of SawStop.
And lots of Powermatic, and a couple of Jet, ...
<http://www.woodcraft.com/category/4/1004064/2081108/Cabinet%20Table%
20Saws.aspx?start=36>
--
Where have all the flowers gone? Pete Seeger 1919-2014
Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> On 3/10/2014 12:27 AM, Leon wrote:
>> On 3/9/2014 9:20 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>>> On 3/9/2014 8:52 PM, Bill wrote:
>>>
>>>>> Have you actually asked a store that sells SawStop how the SS
>>>>> units sell compared to the other brands?
>>>>
>>>> My local Woodcraft store says nobody buys anything else. I don't
>>>> believe them.
>>>>
>>>
>>> They don't even list Delta on their website, but lots of SawStop.
>>>
>>
>> Retail 101, you sell and stock to meet demand.
>
> Possibly another economic factor too. Lawyers tend to drag everyone
> into the suits that has loose change in their pockets. "Woodcraft
> knowingly sold this XYZ brand to my client knowing he could cut his
> penis off if he jumped on top of the saw"
I don't buy that one. I admit that I do not follow this stuff, but it seems
to me that the lawsuits that have been filed and won were against the
manufacturer and not against the retailers. It seems to me that retailers
are not being held accountable in the manner that you suggest.
--
-Mike-
[email protected]
Lee Michaels wrote:
>
> I find it interesting that a store is selling a quality product and
> you reduce this whole marketing and retailing approach as a "selling
> by fear" sales tactic. Maybe it is just a sell a quality product
> because it makes sense for our demographic and targeted market. Remember,
> you can get the cheaper saw many other places. Not that
> many places to get a SawStop.
Bingo.
>
> You have to remember that the retail world is changing, big time. Office
> Max is substantially reducing their stores. They do half of
> their business online now. And almost a quarter of their in store
> sales is selling computer printing supplies. You don't need a big box
> store to sell printing supplies. Radio Shack is closing one quarter
> of their stores. I don't see a future for Radio Shack. Retail is
> tough, and becoming more so every day.
Bingo again! Stores like Woodcraft do not attract enough walk in business
to stock a diverse selection. They have to stock what moves. That's just
market dynamics.
>
> I also feel left out in various businesses product offerings. There
> has been a number of innovative restaurants that have opened near me
> that I just loved. I loved the food, environment, pricing, etc. And
> the all went out of business. I do like barbeque joints though. I
> can bitch and complain all I want. But guess what? I am not part of
> a demographic that would support such a an eating establishment. If
> there were more people like me, those place would still be in
> business. Without sufficient numbers, these bright, creative ideas
> perish.
Geeze Lee - you nailed it!
--
-Mike-
[email protected]
Leon wrote:
> On 3/10/2014 12:16 PM, Mike Marlow wrote:
>> Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>>> On 3/10/2014 12:27 AM, Leon wrote:
>>>> On 3/9/2014 9:20 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>>>>> On 3/9/2014 8:52 PM, Bill wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>> Have you actually asked a store that sells SawStop how the SS
>>>>>>> units sell compared to the other brands?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> My local Woodcraft store says nobody buys anything else. I don't
>>>>>> believe them.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> They don't even list Delta on their website, but lots of SawStop.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Retail 101, you sell and stock to meet demand.
>>>
>>> Possibly another economic factor too. Lawyers tend to drag everyone
>>> into the suits that has loose change in their pockets. "Woodcraft
>>> knowingly sold this XYZ brand to my client knowing he could cut his
>>> penis off if he jumped on top of the saw"
>>
>> I don't buy that one. I admit that I do not follow this stuff, but
>> it seems to me that the lawsuits that have been filed and won were
>> against the manufacturer and not against the retailers. It seems to
>> me that retailers are not being held accountable in the manner that
>> you suggest.
>
>
> While that is logical, only going after the manufacturer and not the
> retailer, even back in the 80's an AC/Delco wholesaler, that I was the
> GM for, had liability insurance in case there was a law suite from a
> failed part that we sold to a dealer. We installed nothing. Especially
> today a lawyer is going to go after who ever he can to win
> a case.
I do understand that but my only point was that the cases to date have not
reflected the retailer being sued.
--
-Mike-
[email protected]
Lee Michaels wrote:
>
>
> "Bill" wrote
>>
>> They eventually moved most of the other saws out of the place. My
>> thinking is that their commissions and markups are much higher on
>> SawStop. They act in a way which is consistent with that. I don't
>> see them doing any other sort of table saw demonstrations on Saturday
>> morning! I don't begrudge them anything, I'm sure it's a tough
>> business to maintain. I could do with out the "selling by fear"
>> sales tactic.
>>
> I can't speak for woodcraft. They are a bit pricy, but do sell some
> quality products. And any retail store that sells to a demographic
> that is up the ladder from hobbyists or home repair guys wants to
> project an image. With products to match that image.
That is interesting. I guess I'm not really in their demographic. I'm
not presently in the market for any Festool products or any new $300
hand planes. The only reason I go more than once of year is because of a
carving group that meets there. I do take an interst in the way that
all people who market or sell to me, do it. For instance, the
observation you made above adds to my insight. When I wrote, I was not
thinking of them projecting an image. My guess was that they were
putting some of those products there to make their other prices appear
lower (that's a common tactic too). Generally, given the opportunity
to pay to project an image myself, I go the other way. Others get
caught up in labels, etc. We weren't all born with a silver spoon...
Bill
Mike Marlow wrote:
> Leon wrote:
>> On 3/10/2014 12:16 PM, Mike Marlow wrote:
>>> Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>>>> On 3/10/2014 12:27 AM, Leon wrote:
>>>>> On 3/9/2014 9:20 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>>>>>> On 3/9/2014 8:52 PM, Bill wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Have you actually asked a store that sells SawStop how the SS
>>>>>>>> units sell compared to the other brands?
>>>>>>> My local Woodcraft store says nobody buys anything else. I don't
>>>>>>> believe them.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> They don't even list Delta on their website, but lots of SawStop.
>>>>>>
>>>>> Retail 101, you sell and stock to meet demand.
>>>> Possibly another economic factor too. Lawyers tend to drag everyone
>>>> into the suits that has loose change in their pockets. "Woodcraft
>>>> knowingly sold this XYZ brand to my client knowing he could cut his
>>>> penis off if he jumped on top of the saw"
>>> I don't buy that one. I admit that I do not follow this stuff, but
>>> it seems to me that the lawsuits that have been filed and won were
>>> against the manufacturer and not against the retailers. It seems to
>>> me that retailers are not being held accountable in the manner that
>>> you suggest.
>>
>> While that is logical, only going after the manufacturer and not the
>> retailer, even back in the 80's an AC/Delco wholesaler, that I was the
>> GM for, had liability insurance in case there was a law suite from a
>> failed part that we sold to a dealer. We installed nothing. Especially
>> today a lawyer is going to go after who ever he can to win
>> a case.
> I do understand that but my only point was that the cases to date have not
> reflected the retailer being sued.
It is like suing Speedway (or equivalent service station) for selling
cigarettes.
>
Leon wrote:
>
> Yes it is BUT many bars have been held liable for over serving
> customers that were involved in an accident. The bar did not make
> the spirits and they did not make the customer drink the drink....
>
Yes, but that's quite a bit different.
--
-Mike-
[email protected]
Mike Marlow wrote:
> Leon wrote:
>
>> Yes it is BUT many bars have been held liable for over serving
>> customers that were involved in an accident. The bar did not make
>> the spirits and they did not make the customer drink the drink....
>>
> Yes, but that's quite a bit different.
I agree. I doubt that even Leon even believes it at this point.
Leon wrote:
> On 3/10/2014 5:10 PM, Bill wrote:
>> Mike Marlow wrote:
>>> Leon wrote:
>>>
>>>> Yes it is BUT many bars have been held liable for over serving
>>>> customers that were involved in an accident. The bar did not make
>>>> the spirits and they did not make the customer drink the drink....
>>>>
>>> Yes, but that's quite a bit different.
>>
>> I agree. I doubt that even Leon even believes it at this point.
>>
> What I believe and what I think is right are two different things.
>
> I believe that it is not beyond a possibility that if you are in any
> way involved or associated with any form of delivery of a product that
> may at any time cause harm to the end user that an ambulance chaser
> has you on his radar.
The key detail is that you would have to prove "negligence". Is
it the employee's jobs to judge the safety of all of the products on the
shelf? Answer: No.
Now if they sold a saw with a known arbor problem that would be
different. Just my opinion.
Bill
>
> Is that right? no. IMHO only the manufacturer of a defective product
> should be held liable. No one in between.
Leon wrote:
> On 3/10/2014 5:10 PM, Bill wrote:
>> Mike Marlow wrote:
>>> Leon wrote:
>>>
>>>> Yes it is BUT many bars have been held liable for over serving
>>>> customers that were involved in an accident. The bar did not make
>>>> the spirits and they did not make the customer drink the drink....
>>>>
>>> Yes, but that's quite a bit different.
>>
>> I agree. I doubt that even Leon even believes it at this point.
>>
>
>
> And just one more thing concerning the bar example.
>
> Bob stops by the liquor store on the way home and picks up a bottle of
> his favorite booz. He also stops by his favorite watering hole and
> has close to his limit and the bartender stops serving. Bob leaves
> with a couple of his buddies and crack open the bottle of booz in the
> car, finishes it off, and tosses the bottle. He has an accident and
> now who is liable.
Bob. Although if Bob doesn't reveal the truth, he might have even bigger
problems if the truth ever comes out. Actually, the whole affair sounds
like it will play into a very expensive case. One of Bob's buddies will
probably turn him in for the reward money. : )
>
> Don't think for a second that this does not happen.
>
>
>
>
Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> On 3/10/2014 5:24 PM, Mike Marlow wrote:
>> Leon wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Yes it is BUT many bars have been held liable for over serving
>>> customers that were involved in an accident. The bar did not make
>>> the spirits and they did not make the customer drink the drink....
>>>
>>
>> Yes, but that's quite a bit different.
>>
>
> Is it? When I bought my Delta saw, the salesman gave me a 15 minute
> lesson in its operation and safety. If I went home and cut my hand
> off it would be easy to blame him for not giving mr a proper lesson.
There must be a precedent for these issues. Many woodworking books
indicate they are not responsible for any accidents, etc. But a book IS
a form of instruction. Once a salesman myself, I can tell you that
sellers to not always understand what they are selling. There is a price
on each item, and we were agents willing to trade the items for cash! : )
How about the case of a fishing tackle shop that sells some fresh
night-crawlers they got from someone else, that sells some to a family.
The family goes fishing and one of the kids eats a green night crawler
and gets sick and dies due to the fact that green night crawlers have
unknown nutritional content. Question: Does that open a new can of
worms? Should there have been a warning label? : )
Leon wrote:
> On 3/10/2014 2:14 PM, Bill wrote:
>> Mike Marlow wrote:
>>> Leon wrote:
>>>> On 3/10/2014 12:16 PM, Mike Marlow wrote:
>>>>> Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>>>>>> On 3/10/2014 12:27 AM, Leon wrote:
>>>>>>> On 3/9/2014 9:20 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 3/9/2014 8:52 PM, Bill wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Have you actually asked a store that sells SawStop how the SS
>>>>>>>>>> units sell compared to the other brands?
>>>>>>>>> My local Woodcraft store says nobody buys anything else. I don't
>>>>>>>>> believe them.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> They don't even list Delta on their website, but lots of SawStop.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Retail 101, you sell and stock to meet demand.
>>>>>> Possibly another economic factor too. Lawyers tend to drag everyone
>>>>>> into the suits that has loose change in their pockets. "Woodcraft
>>>>>> knowingly sold this XYZ brand to my client knowing he could cut his
>>>>>> penis off if he jumped on top of the saw"
>>>>> I don't buy that one. I admit that I do not follow this stuff, but
>>>>> it seems to me that the lawsuits that have been filed and won were
>>>>> against the manufacturer and not against the retailers. It seems to
>>>>> me that retailers are not being held accountable in the manner that
>>>>> you suggest.
>>>>
>>>> While that is logical, only going after the manufacturer and not the
>>>> retailer, even back in the 80's an AC/Delco wholesaler, that I was the
>>>> GM for, had liability insurance in case there was a law suite from a
>>>> failed part that we sold to a dealer. We installed nothing.
>>>> Especially
>>>> today a lawyer is going to go after who ever he can to win
>>>> a case.
>>> I do understand that but my only point was that the cases to date have
>>> not
>>> reflected the retailer being sued.
>>
>> It is like suing Speedway (or equivalent service station) for selling
>> cigarettes.
>>
>>>
>>
>
> Yes it is BUT many bars have been held liable for over serving
> customers that were involved in an accident. The bar did not make the
> spirits and they did not make the customer drink the drink....
>
> In this day and age, you never know who is coming after you.
>
You roused my curiosity. There is a lot of information here if anyone
wants to become a lawyer:
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Product+Liability
Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> On 3/10/2014 5:24 PM, Mike Marlow wrote:
>> Leon wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Yes it is BUT many bars have been held liable for over serving
>>> customers that were involved in an accident. The bar did not make
>>> the spirits and they did not make the customer drink the drink....
>>>
>>
>> Yes, but that's quite a bit different.
>>
>
> Is it? When I bought my Delta saw, the salesman gave me a 15 minute
> lesson in its operation and safety. If I went home and cut my hand
> off it would be easy to blame him for not giving mr a proper lesson.
I understand your position but it's one thing to simply state something like
that in an internet newsgroup and it's another thing all together to
actually win that lawsuit. My point was not to argue that at some point
that would never happen, since we are getting crazier and crazier every day
with lawsuits, but simply to state that I didn't necessarily believe that
was why Woodcraft was taking other brand saws off their floors, since to
date there have not been such suits against the retailer.
--
-Mike-
[email protected]
Leon wrote:
>
> This discussion is not so much about right or wrong so much as can you
> afford to defend yourself if you don't have liability insurance.
>
Just a comment (since you were thoughtful enough to consider my "green
night-crawler case"). Some entity that doesn't have enough resources
to defend itself, probably doesn't make much of a legal target. Of
course, I'm sure there is a middle ground where it is profitable...
BTW, I appreciate you pointing out the tactic that car-salesman might
use--to get you behind the wheel to give you the "new car rush". It has
never occurred to me.
Bill
On Sun, 09 Mar 2014 18:22:05 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>That's really my point. Choice is good. In a decade, when the Gass
>patents run out, I may trade.
So there it is. You're openly admitting that SawStop type technology
has value. That's really all I was looking for you to say.
Question is, would you still consider buying a SawStop type competitor
saw if prices for the clone technology were almost the same as SawStop
is now?
Table saw manufacturers are in the business to make money. For all
your whining about outlandish costs, what makes you think that prices
will come down much when the patents expire?
In the end, you're damned if you're going to be forced into anything,
even if it's good for you. Obviously, that's the point you've been
trying to make all along.
On 3/10/2014 5:10 PM, Bill wrote:
> Mike Marlow wrote:
>> Leon wrote:
>>
>>> Yes it is BUT many bars have been held liable for over serving
>>> customers that were involved in an accident. The bar did not make
>>> the spirits and they did not make the customer drink the drink....
>>>
>> Yes, but that's quite a bit different.
>
> I agree. I doubt that even Leon even believes it at this point.
>
And just one more thing concerning the bar example.
Bob stops by the liquor store on the way home and picks up a bottle of
his favorite booz. He also stops by his favorite watering hole and has
close to his limit and the bartender stops serving. Bob leaves with a
couple of his buddies and crack open the bottle of booz in the car,
finishes it off, and tosses the bottle. He has an accident and now who
is liable.
Don't think for a second that this does not happen.
On 3/9/2014 8:06 PM, Max wrote:
>>>
>>> And that's a consensus or just an opinion. ;-)
>>>
>>
>>
>> It is a consensus. Most all TS reports, with the SawStop involved,
>> most always place the SawStop as a top quality machine.
>>
>>
>> Simply the arbor/trunnion assembly is quite HD on all models when
>> compared to the competition.
>
> If it's a consensus how do other manufacturers manage to stay in business?
By making sales of tablesaws. While the consensus is Lamborghini is a
fun car to drive to work, most of us can't afford one for an every day
driver. Sears still sells a bunch of the $299 saws to people that would
rather have a $1500 SawStop.
On 3/9/2014 2:13 PM, Max wrote:
> On 3/9/2014 10:28 AM, [email protected] wrote:
>
> some snip...but..
>
>> The SawStop mechanism DOES NOT double the price of the saw. It doesn't
>> even come close. The SawStop tablesaw itself is a well made, very
>> decent operating tablesaw with top notch fit and finish.
>>
>> There's a number of regular $3000 tablesaws on the market and the
>> SawStop is as good if not better than all of them.
>>
>
> And that's a consensus or just an opinion. ;-)
>
It is a consensus. Most all TS reports, with the SawStop involved,
most always place the SawStop as a top quality machine.
Simply the arbor/trunnion assembly is quite HD on all models when
compared to the competition.
On 3/9/2015 10:35 AM, Leon wrote:
> On 3/9/2015 5:49 AM, Dr. Deb wrote:
>> I know you have gotten a ton of replies, but I just got a 36" Steel
>> City Artisan saw and love it. The built in roll around comes in
>> handy, don't have to worry about rust, rock solid, only had to make
>> ONE adjustment coming out of the box (one wing adjuster was a tad
>> high), good dust collection. I simply could not be happier and the
>> latest price was around $900 from Tool Werks.
>>
>> Deb
>>
>
>
> I laughed at my self foe responding to this post, it is over a year old.
Don't feel bad, we laughed at you too. <g,d&r>
--
eWoodShop: www.eWoodShop.com
Wood Shop: www.e-WoodShop.net
https://www.google.com/+eWoodShop
https://plus.google.com/+KarlCaillouet/posts
http://www.custommade.com/by/ewoodshop/
KarlCaillouet@ (the obvious)
On 3/8/2014 9:53 PM, Leon wrote:
> On 3/8/2014 10:05 PM, woodchucker wrote:
>> On 3/8/2014 10:14 PM, Elrond Hubbard wrote:
>>> Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet> wrote in
>>> news:[email protected]:
>>>
>>>
>> So looking back I did not see a previous post from Elron Hubbard, so who
>> did you post your opinion as???
>>
>>
>>
> Obliviously a sock puppet that I have wasted enough time on.
Leon, Jeff,
Time to step back and take a deep breath. In fact most of the
contributors to this thread should do so. When reasoned discourse and
emotional involvement meet each other, the "reasoned" part seems to fade.
mahalo,
jo4hn
On Sat, 08 Mar 2014 00:17:50 -0500, [email protected] wrote:
>On 08 Mar 2014 02:58:43 GMT, Tyrone Tiews <[email protected]> wrote:
>>enough to say I can't get hurt again, but if I do, it won't be because I
>>have a false sense of security from having a saw that makes a workshop safe
>>for hot dogs.
>
>Do you wear a seatbelt when you're driving Tyrone?
Not Tyrone, but... Sure, but not if I had to pay twice as much for
the car with one.
>Do you have a smoke detector or carbon monoxide detector in your home Tyrone?
Yes. No. Neither, if I had to pay twice as much for the house.
>The SawStop
>is a safety device just like anything else.
Not like everything else. The difference is the cost (and the
patents). Let's do this again after the patents run out.
>If all these things are
>likely to give you a false sense of security then you've got a
>serious problem.
You can deny human nature all you want but it doesn't change it.
On 3/9/2014 8:25 PM, [email protected] wrote:
> On Sun, 09 Mar 2014 20:05:02 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet>
>> That is exactly true. Some people will buy an American or German
>> product but never again after having the opportunity to use or own a
>> Japanese product. It is all in how much value you place in safety,
>> quality, value. etc. Safety is my personal top of the list and is the
>> leading reason that I recently bought the industrial SS over the Laguna
>> TS with the scoring blade.
>
> In conjunction with your thumb injury years ago, your woodworking is
> frequently used for making a living. I suspect your wife's opinion
> might be an additional factor. All those factors added together would
> be a great motivator for a SawStop purchase.
>
She knew that I was proponent of the saw and gave me the go ahead
shortly after helping me with cutting a panel last spring. ;~)
There was a planed for and anticipated incident that got her attention.
On 3/9/2014 5:05 PM, [email protected] wrote:
> On Sun, 09 Mar 2014 13:31:05 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet>
> wrote:
>
>> On 3/9/2014 12:18 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>>> On Sun, 09 Mar 2014 13:03:10 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Sun, 09 Mar 2014 12:42:21 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>>>>> Fact, Jack. That's *exactly* the decision I was confronted with.
>>>>> $1600 for the Unisaw - $3500 for the "equivalent" SawStop. The $1600
>>>>> was do-able (up from the $1400 for the budgeted Griz). $3500 would
>>>>> have had me laughed out of the "capital acquisition" meeting.
>>>>
>>>> As usual, your fact are full of holes.
>>>
>>> Now you're calling me a liar. Figures.
>>>
>>>> Powermatic PM2000 ~ $3000
>>>> Delta 36-L352 ~ $3000
>>>> SawStop Professional cabinet saw ~ $3000
>>>>
>>>> http://www.consumersearch.com/table-saw-reviews/cabinet-saws
>>>
>>> I'm telling you WHAT MY DECISION WAS. GOT IT?
>>>
>>>> The REAL TRUTH is that MOST SawStop naysayers like you are too busy
>>>> letting your emotions overrule your common sense. You hate GASS'
>>>> business tactics so much that you'll consider any excuse to exclude a
>>>> SawStop from your purchasing condition.
>>>
>>> Bullshit. Like most suck-ups, you're talking out both sides of your
>>> mouth. You admit that price is an issue and that there is a decision
>>> to be made, yet you denigrate those who don't agree with a choice
>>> you've NEVER MADE and probably never will.
>>>
>>> I don't care that some love SawStop. Sobeit. Their decision.
>>> However, when some know-nothing jumps into the fray, talking out both
>>> sided of his mouth, it's really funny.
>>>
>>
>>
>> It does speak volumes to actually have stepped up and bought the saw. I
>> did.
>
> Yes, it means you weighed the choices and decided that it was worth
> it. I'm perfectly fine with that, as long as that choice exists.
>
>> Every one is entitled to their opinion with out being attacked and or
>> being compared to an idiot or the possibility of being more of an idiot.
>
> Well, that's really at the bottom of my point. Choice is a good
> thing.
>
>> Experience trumps, "what he said" or going with the popular consensus,
>> every time.
>
> AGW is pretty popular but it doesn't make it right. Socialism is
> pretty popular, right now, too.
>
I think where you and I may be at odds on this discussion is that you
might think that "I" think the SawStop should be in every ones shop. I
don't believe that to the extent that everyone must have one in their
shop. I think it would be good if the competition would have partnered
with SawStop to begin with and then every one could have had the choice
of having the technology "or not" in the brands of their choice.
I prefer to leave the political aspect out of the discussion.
On Tue, 11 Mar 2014 15:40:10 -0400, "Mike Marlow"
>Yes, in that exreme, I do agree. I do not however agree that there has been
>a tremenous amount of logic and unemotion thought in this thread. A lot of
>assertions, but I don't see much of that valued logic stuff.
Well, that's slightly different. Almost every time, the SawStop has
been discussed, I've gotten into it with krw. That is emotion driven
because we thoroughly detest each other. That's different only because
the discussion is online. If the conversations we've had were in
person, I'm sure we'd have tried to beat the crap out of each other.
We can't do that online, so pent up emotions get let loose. :)
On Sun, 09 Mar 2014 20:05:02 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet>
>That is exactly true. Some people will buy an American or German
>product but never again after having the opportunity to use or own a
>Japanese product. It is all in how much value you place in safety,
>quality, value. etc. Safety is my personal top of the list and is the
>leading reason that I recently bought the industrial SS over the Laguna
>TS with the scoring blade.
In conjunction with your thumb injury years ago, your woodworking is
frequently used for making a living. I suspect your wife's opinion
might be an additional factor. All those factors added together would
be a great motivator for a SawStop purchase.
On Sun, 09 Mar 2014 13:31:05 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet>
wrote:
>On 3/9/2014 12:18 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>> On Sun, 09 Mar 2014 13:03:10 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>>
>>> On Sun, 09 Mar 2014 12:42:21 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>>>> Fact, Jack. That's *exactly* the decision I was confronted with.
>>>> $1600 for the Unisaw - $3500 for the "equivalent" SawStop. The $1600
>>>> was do-able (up from the $1400 for the budgeted Griz). $3500 would
>>>> have had me laughed out of the "capital acquisition" meeting.
>>>
>>> As usual, your fact are full of holes.
>>
>> Now you're calling me a liar. Figures.
>>
>>> Powermatic PM2000 ~ $3000
>>> Delta 36-L352 ~ $3000
>>> SawStop Professional cabinet saw ~ $3000
>>>
>>> http://www.consumersearch.com/table-saw-reviews/cabinet-saws
>>
>> I'm telling you WHAT MY DECISION WAS. GOT IT?
>>
>>> The REAL TRUTH is that MOST SawStop naysayers like you are too busy
>>> letting your emotions overrule your common sense. You hate GASS'
>>> business tactics so much that you'll consider any excuse to exclude a
>>> SawStop from your purchasing condition.
>>
>> Bullshit. Like most suck-ups, you're talking out both sides of your
>> mouth. You admit that price is an issue and that there is a decision
>> to be made, yet you denigrate those who don't agree with a choice
>> you've NEVER MADE and probably never will.
>>
>> I don't care that some love SawStop. Sobeit. Their decision.
>> However, when some know-nothing jumps into the fray, talking out both
>> sided of his mouth, it's really funny.
>>
>
>
>It does speak volumes to actually have stepped up and bought the saw. I
>did.
Yes, it means you weighed the choices and decided that it was worth
it. I'm perfectly fine with that, as long as that choice exists.
>Every one is entitled to their opinion with out being attacked and or
>being compared to an idiot or the possibility of being more of an idiot.
Well, that's really at the bottom of my point. Choice is a good
thing.
>Experience trumps, "what he said" or going with the popular consensus,
>every time.
AGW is pretty popular but it doesn't make it right. Socialism is
pretty popular, right now, too.
On Tue, 11 Mar 2014 08:13:06 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet>
>Agreed, I don't think an insurance company can dictate what brand
>products you sell or use. Their pricing to insure you might do that
>however.
I was thinking back to when Rob Lee was giving me a tour of the new
downtown Toronto store. It had a new SawStop down one of the seminar
rooms. Apparently, the company's insurance company had coerced the use
of SawStops in all the stores.
This was several years ago, before any SawStop related payouts had hit
the industry.
On 3/13/2014 5:07 AM, Swingman wrote:
> On 3/12/2014 6:27 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>
>> Bingo! You ran the board.
>
>
> EOT?
>
>
One more question; where are SawStops manufactured and if in the US are
any parts made "off shore"?
I ask primarily because of the statement on their website:
"100% U.S. Owned, Operated and Engineered"
(nothing about where they're built)
On 3/17/2014 10:30 PM, Leon wrote:
> On 3/17/2014 7:22 PM, Max wrote:
>> One more question; where are SawStops manufactured and if in the US are
>> any parts made "off shore"?
>> I ask primarily because of the statement on their website:
>>
>> "100% U.S. Owned, Operated and Engineered"
>>
>> (nothing about where they're built)
>
>
> Taiwan If it were built in the USA it really really would be expensive.
I can live with that. ;-)
On 3/12/2014 6:27 PM, [email protected] wrote:
> Bingo! You ran the board.
EOT?
--
eWoodShop: www.eWoodShop.com
Wood Shop: www.e-WoodShop.net
https://www.google.com/+eWoodShop
https://plus.google.com/+KarlCaillouet/posts
http://www.custommade.com/by/ewoodshop/
KarlCaillouet@ (the obvious)
On 3/17/2014 7:22 PM, Max wrote:
> On 3/13/2014 5:07 AM, Swingman wrote:
>> On 3/12/2014 6:27 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>>
>>> Bingo! You ran the board.
>>
>>
>> EOT?
>>
>>
>
> One more question; where are SawStops manufactured and if in the US are
> any parts made "off shore"?
> I ask primarily because of the statement on their website:
>
> "100% U.S. Owned, Operated and Engineered"
>
> (nothing about where they're built)
Taiwan If it were built in the USA it really really would be expensive.
On 3/17/2014 8:22 PM, Max wrote:
> On 3/13/2014 5:07 AM, Swingman wrote:
>> On 3/12/2014 6:27 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>>
>>> Bingo! You ran the board.
>>
>>
>> EOT?
>>
>>
>
> One more question; where are SawStops manufactured and if in the US are
> any parts made "off shore"?
> I ask primarily because of the statement on their website:
>
> "100% U.S. Owned, Operated and Engineered"
>
> (nothing about where they're built)
offshore. I believe Taiwan, not certain.
Nothing is made here anymore that I am aware of.
--
Jeff
[email protected] wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Mar 2014 08:13:06 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet>
>> Agreed, I don't think an insurance company can dictate what brand
>> products you sell or use. Their pricing to insure you might do that
>> however.
>
> I was thinking back to when Rob Lee was giving me a tour of the new
> downtown Toronto store. It had a new SawStop down one of the seminar
> rooms. Apparently, the company's insurance company had coerced the use
> of SawStops in all the stores.
Interesting statement Dave - what makes you say that?
--
-Mike-
[email protected]
[email protected] wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Mar 2014 15:00:48 -0400, "Mike Marlow"
>>> It is absolutely a common sense thing. But many people let their
>>> emotions factor in on their decisions.
>
>> Well - of course we do - we are people. If you try to deny that
>> you don't do the same, I'm going to have to call you on that. You
>> may feel that you are totally logical, but that is only based on how
>> you, or I, or anyone else views our own sense of logic. I will
>> assure you - there is no such thing as a totally logical person on
>> the face of this earth.
>
> Of course there's always emotions involved, but there's different
> types and different levels of emotions. You just have to stifle them
> as much as you can and go from there. If you go into something where
> logic is required and you're too angry or too upset, then you're going
> to have a problem.
Yes, in that exreme, I do agree. I do not however agree that there has been
a tremenous amount of logic and unemotion thought in this thread. A lot of
assertions, but I don't see much of that valued logic stuff.
--
-Mike-
[email protected]
On Tue, 11 Mar 2014 15:00:48 -0400, "Mike Marlow"
>> It is absolutely a common sense thing. But many people let their
>> emotions factor in on their decisions.
>Well - of course we do - we are people. If you try to deny that you don't
>do the same, I'm going to have to call you on that. You may feel that you
>are totally logical, but that is only based on how you, or I, or anyone else
>views our own sense of logic. I will assure you - there is no such thing as
>a totally logical person on the face of this earth.
Of course there's always emotions involved, but there's different
types and different levels of emotions. You just have to stifle them
as much as you can and go from there. If you go into something where
logic is required and you're too angry or too upset, then you're going
to have a problem.
On Wed, 12 Mar 2014 06:02:14 -0400, Ed Pawlowski <[email protected]> wrote:
>On Tue, 11 Mar 2014 12:06:28 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet>
>wrote:
>
>
>
>>
>>This whole disagreement on the SawStop is mostly based on whether you
>>have a dislike for the SawStop product because of it's owner or if you
>>simply judge the product on it's own merits. Again if you let emotion
>>play a part of your decision making you may not get the best deal on
>>paper. As with anything you buy if you are happy with your decision you
>>got a good deal for you. We like to buy what we like whether what we
>>like is a good product or not. When we put aside the good feeling and
>>look only at the facts we make better decisions.
>
>
>You have to despise the guy for his tactics to make it law to use his
>product.
+1
>You have to admire the guy for taking the risk and starting his own
>business with the high quality saw.
+1
>You have to step back from all of that and make a decision based on
>facts and what is best for you.
Bingo! You ran the board.
On Mon, 10 Mar 2014 12:24:05 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>His whole example was done to lie. It's his MO.
I read your crap for its entertainment value. You don't like what I
post? Take some of your own advice and don't read it.
Not that I expected anything different, but you really are a senile
old fool aren't you?
On Tue, 11 Mar 2014 05:43:04 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>On Sun, 09 Mar 2014 13:18:27 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>>Now you're calling me a liar. Figures.
>
>Fact is, you are a liar.
You can't even read, moron.
> You twist what's been said, ignore pertinent
>statements and outright lie when it serves your purpose. Coupled with
>your ongoing senility, any discussion where there's even the slightest
>disagreement, you go off the deep and start fabricating bullshit.
You're lying. Again. Still. Again, if you don't like what you think
I write, why do you torture yourself by reading it? You must be as
stupid as I've said to put yourself through that much pain.
On Sun, 09 Mar 2014 20:53:30 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>On Sun, 09 Mar 2014 13:18:27 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>>Bullshit. Like most suck-ups, you're talking out both sides of your
>>mouth. You admit that price is an issue and that there is a decision
>>to be made, yet you denigrate those who don't agree with a choice
>>you've NEVER MADE and probably never will
>
>Well, as usual, when you've got nothing of value to add to the
>discussion, you spiral down into insulting rhetoric. It must be really
>difficult to be you. My condolences.
Well, as usual, you've shown your true colors. Please killfile me or
STFU.
On 08 Mar 2014 02:58:43 GMT, Tyrone Tiews <[email protected]> wrote:
>enough to say I can't get hurt again, but if I do, it won't be because I
>have a false sense of security from having a saw that makes a workshop safe
>for hot dogs.
Do you wear a seatbelt when you're driving Tyrone? Do you have a smoke
detector or carbon monoxide detector in your home Tyrone? The SawStop
is a safety device just like anything else. If all these things are
likely to give you a false sense of security then you've got a
serious problem.
On Sun, 09 Mar 2014 13:18:27 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>Bullshit. Like most suck-ups, you're talking out both sides of your
>mouth. You admit that price is an issue and that there is a decision
>to be made, yet you denigrate those who don't agree with a choice
>you've NEVER MADE and probably never will
Well, as usual, when you've got nothing of value to add to the
discussion, you spiral down into insulting rhetoric. It must be really
difficult to be you. My condolences.
On Sun, 09 Mar 2014 21:37:48 -0600, Max <[email protected]> wrote:
>On 3/9/2014 6:34 PM, Leon wrote:
>> On 3/9/2014 7:30 PM, Larry Blanchard wrote:
>>> On Sun, 09 Mar 2014 18:09:31 -0500, Leon wrote:
>>>
>>>> And if yu simply don't want to send any pennies Gass's way that is OK
>>>> too.
>>>> ;~)
>>>
>>> Well, there is that :-).
>>>
>>> But now that we've resurrected the Sawstop debate, would the original
>>> poster please tell us what he decided to buy. Or did we thoroughly
>>> confuse the issue?
>>>
>>
>>
>> Yeah Buckwheat, Tyrone, Max, Larry J. Which did you decide on. I think
>> you know who may be all four of these guys.
>
>I have a Unisaw with which I am well pleased...except for dust
>collection. *If* I should decide that I want a new table saw I can tell
>you right now that dust collection will be the deciding factor after
>comparable quality.
Say Amen!
On Sun, 09 Mar 2014 13:18:27 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>Now you're calling me a liar. Figures.
Fact is, you are a liar. You twist what's been said, ignore pertinent
statements and outright lie when it serves your purpose. Coupled with
your ongoing senility, any discussion where there's even the slightest
disagreement, you go off the deep and start fabricating bullshit.
On Wed, 5 Mar 2014 03:28:34 GMT, [email protected] wrote:
>hey guys, i am looking to purchase a new table saw.......have a 10 year
>old craftsman contractor saw and need to upgrade. i will have to put it
>into my basement with limited space, so looking for decent contractor saw.
>This Grizzly http://www.grizzly.com/products/Contractor-Style-Saw/G0732
>is the saw i am leaning towards purchasing. are there any better options in
>this price range? tia
In the past Grizzly's in this price range have used a throat plate
that was of thin material that hard to use a zero clearance plate. If
that is an issue to you then you might want to check into that.
On 3/4/2014 10:28 PM, [email protected] wrote:
> hey guys, i am looking to purchase a new table saw.......have a 10 year
> old craftsman contractor saw and need to upgrade. i will have to put it
> into my basement with limited space, so looking for decent contractor saw.
> This Grizzly http://www.grizzly.com/products/Contractor-Style-Saw/G0732
> is the saw i am leaning towards purchasing. are there any better options in
> this price range? tia
>
Go for a hybrid.
It will at least control dust more easily.
And this has more upgrades, fence, weight,
--
Jeff
On 3/4/2014 10:39 PM, woodchucker wrote:
> On 3/4/2014 10:28 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>> hey guys, i am looking to purchase a new table saw.......have a 10 year
>> old craftsman contractor saw and need to upgrade. i will have to put it
>> into my basement with limited space, so looking for decent contractor
>> saw.
>> This Grizzly http://www.grizzly.com/products/Contractor-Style-Saw/G0732
>> is the saw i am leaning towards purchasing. are there any better
>> options in
>> this price range? tia
>>
> Go for a hybrid.
> It will at least control dust more easily.
> And this has more upgrades, fence, weight,
>
>
>
http://www.grizzly.com/products/10-Hybrid-Table-Saw-with-Riving-Knife-Polar-Bear-Series-/G0715P
--
Jeff