How much runout on TS is too much

"The Davenport's" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>> Good point, but to answer the question, NO ONE does that.
>
> (raising hand in a grade school manner...) I do.


I think Jow was refering to ripping a board to width 3" +, - .001"
If you are doing "that", don't remeasure today's rip tomorrow. :~)

On Oct 15, 10:38 am, B A R R Y <[email protected]> wrote:
> RayV wrote:
>
> > Is 0.001" alignment close enough?
> > Is 0.003" blade runout too much?
>
> How do test rips look?

Hard to tell, I went looking for a decent combination blade over the
weekend but couldn't find one. The Avanti (50T $30) blade cuts right
through Maple but leaves hatchet marks. I will stop at the Lumberyard
today and see what they have, I will probably end up ordering one of
these:
http://www.forrestsawbladesonline.com/category_2_Woodworker_II.html

On Oct 15, 7:36 am, RayV <[email protected]> wrote:
> My latest project requires me to rip some 1 1/2" Maple so I deicded to
> check blade alignment.

Good idea. Like cherry, maple is prone to show scorch marks and any
closed grain wood will make blade marks more obvious.

> I cobbled together a jig similar to thishttp://www.newwoodworker.com/dilindjig.html
> to check my setup

That will do the trick for blade and fence alignment.

> My alignment, which I think is OK, is 0.001". Not bad considering I
> used this method to align my bladehttp://www.woodmagazine.com/wood/story.jsp?storyid=/templatedata/wood...
> (whoever came up with that technique is a genius)

I'm wondering why you think the alignment is this close. See my
comments below.

Is the "Ray Vojtash" of the Wood Mag article the same as "RayV" of
this posted message? I'm not sure why you think the technique is
special or better than any other "feel the rub" technique. It doesn't
matter if you hold the stick (or bevel gauge blade) against the miter
gauge or screw it onto the bar, it's the exact same technique.

> The runout measuered on the body of the blade is 0.003". I think this
> is too much but it could be the 'silver' coating on the Avanti blade I
> just bought.

It is a bit high, but not outrageous. It's probably not the silver
coating on the blade (unless this coating is thick paint). This
brings up the alignment question I mentioned above. How can you be
sure of your alignment accuracy when the blade runout is three times
higher? Did you mark a spot on the blade and make all your
measurements on that spot (rotating the blade)? Or did you just run
the indicator stylus along the surface of the blade?

> Is 0.001" alignment close enough?

Yes. In general, anything less than 0.005" is good enough. I've done
a lot of testing with various blades and woods. Even with
magnification, I could not detect any improvement in the quality of
the cut surface for alignment error below 0.005"

> Is 0.003" blade runout too much?

It means that your cut surface will have ripples in it that are 0.003"
deep. The size and shape of these ripples will depend on how high you
raise the blade and how fast you feed the stock. This sort of defect
can easily be seen and felt on exposed surfaces so expect it to
require some extra cleanup. Good quality modern glues don't generally
have any trouble filling 0.003" gaps between mating surfaces.

You need to determine if this runout is due to blade warp or an arbor/
flange problem. You can easily use your setup to check both the arbor
and the flange. You will want to tilt the arbor so that the dial
indicator can meet the surface of the flange at 90 degrees. You will
want to leave the arbor at 0 degrees to check arbor runout. Hopefully
there is a spot along the surface of the arbor where you can avoid the
threads. You should see less than 0.001" runout on both of these.

> Is it OK to have the dial indicator angled so the measurement can be
> taken closer to the table or does it need to be 90deg?

The best practice is to keep the dial indicator plunger at 90 degrees
to the surface being measured (zero degrees tilt). When the dial
indicator is tilted at an angle it introduces error into the reading.
The error is going to make the reading look higher than actual changes
in the surface being measured. It will also exaggerate any
instability in your dial indicator fixturing.

> (as seen here, but not my site)http://home.comcast.net/~kvaughn65/dial_indicator.jpg

You can calculate the actual geometry from the dial indicator
reading. It is equal to the dial indicator reading times the cosine
of the tilt (away from 90). The cosine of zero degrees is 1 (best
situation). If you are tilting your indicator by 30 degrees, then
multiply your readings by 0.86 to see what it would read if there were
no tilt.

Tilting the indicator is a better alternative than using one of those
flat blade replacement plates. Apart from the monetary savings ($40
or more), and the time you save not needing to swap out your blade,
you won't be introducing a reference surface with unknown errors. The
specs on one popular plate seen in catalogs and online are +/-0.003".
You could think that you've aligned your saw properly when all you
actually did was align it to match the warp in the blade replacement
plate.

Feel free to ask questions.

Ed Bennett
[email protected]

http://www.ts-aligner.com
Home of the TS-Aligner

On Oct 15, 2:09 pm, Ed Bennett <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > My alignment, which I think is OK, is 0.001". Not bad considering I
> > used this method to align my bladehttp://www.woodmagazine.com/wood/story.jsp?storyid=/templatedata/wood...
> > (whoever came up with that technique is a genius)
>
> I'm wondering why you think the alignment is this close. See my
> comments below.
>
> Is the "Ray Vojtash" of the Wood Mag article the same as "RayV" of
> this posted message?

sure is.

> How can you be
> sure of your alignment accuracy when the blade runout is three times
> higher? Did you mark a spot on the blade and make all your
> measurements on that spot (rotating the blade)?

yes

>
> > Is 0.003" blade runout too much?
>
> It means that your cut surface will have ripples in it that are 0.003"
> deep. The size and shape of these ripples will depend on how high you
> raise the blade and how fast you feed the stock. This sort of defect
> can easily be seen and felt on exposed surfaces so expect it to
> require some extra cleanup.

That makes sense.

> You need to determine if this runout is due to blade warp or an arbor/
> flange problem.

I'm going to check it by rotating the blade and then checking the
arbor and flange. I suspect that this $30 blade is warped because
when I've ripped with a good 80T blade I've nearly finish ready
surfaces.

>
> > Is it OK to have the dial indicator angled so the measurement can be
> > taken closer to the table or does it need to be 90deg?
>
> The best practice is to keep the dial indicator plunger at 90 degrees
> to the surface being measured (zero degrees tilt). When the dial
> indicator is tilted at an angle it introduces error into the reading.
> The error is going to make the reading look higher than actual changes
> in the surface being measured. It will also exaggerate any
> instability in your dial indicator fixturing.
>
> You can calculate the actual geometry from the dial indicator
> reading. It is equal to the dial indicator reading times the cosine
> of the tilt (away from 90). The cosine of zero degrees is 1 (best
> situation). If you are tilting your indicator by 30 degrees, then
> multiply your readings by 0.86 to see what it would read if there were
> no tilt.

Thanks. I'll see if I can modify my jig to get it closer to 90deg so
I don't need to look for my calculator.

The indicator I have does have a pin 180 from the working end but I
would have to grind the lug off of the back to make using that
worthwhile. I might be able to get the back lug to go below the table
if I measure from the left side of the blade.

Your point about the blade runout equaling depth of hash marks on the
wood makes sense to me so I will investigate that further.
Thanks Ed.



>
> Tilting the indicator is a better alternative than using one of those
> flat blade replacement plates. Apart from the monetary savings ($40
> or more), and the time you save not needing to swap out your blade,
> you won't be introducing a reference surface with unknown errors. The
> specs on one popular plate seen in catalogs and online are +/-0.003".
> You could think that you've aligned your saw properly when all you
> actually did was align it to match the warp in the blade replacement
> plate.
>
> Feel free to ask questions.
>
> Ed Bennett
> [email protected]
>
> http://www.ts-aligner.com
> Home of the TS-Aligner

On Oct 15, 2:09 pm, Ed Bennett <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Oct 15, 7:36 am, RayV <[email protected]> wrote:
<snip>
> > Is it OK to have the dial indicator angled so the measurement can be
> > taken closer to the table or does it need to be 90deg?
>
> The best practice is to keep the dial indicator plunger at 90 degrees
> to the surface being measured (zero degrees tilt).

<snip>

> Ed Bennett
> [email protected]
>
> http://www.ts-aligner.com
> Home of the TS-Aligner

Looking at your site just made me realize that I don't need the
indicator near the table to check blade runout. I can do that up
high. I just need to get it close to 90deg near the table to check my
alignment.

Thanks again.

On Oct 15, 9:47 am, "Leon" <[email protected]> wrote:

> Regardless of what kind of measuring equipment you use to set the saw up,
> you have no control over the fact that most wood does not remain dead flat
> or straight to the extent that those tiny measurements that you tweak you
> saw to come in to effect. They help but often wood can warp as you cut it.
> Wood often will move during the cut much more than the tolerances that you
> are looking at and then every thing becomes a moot point.

This is very true. Most wood just can't hold these sorts of
tolerances. Even the heat generated by cutting will cause dimensional
changes on the order of 0.001". But, like you said previously, we're
not talking about working wood to within a few thousandths of an
inch. We're talking about aligning a machine. The goal here is to
make sure that the machine doesn't introduce additional problems
(beyond those inherent in the wood). You want to avoid having to
clean-up or re-work something that the machine could have done
correctly to begin with.

Wood does change dimensionally over time. So, the wise and skillful
woodworker will not to allow a lot of time between cutting and fitting
parts together. In other words, don't cut out all the parts one day
and then try to assemble them on another day - especially if you
expect the weather to change. Also, if you notice a board warping or
twisting during a rip cut, it's a very significant sign that the
particular piece of wood doesn't belong in your project. It was
improperly dried ("case hardened") and will be nothing but trouble if
you use it (reminds me of an armoire my brother made).

> Or wait a little while and Ed will try to sell you an aligner that may or
> may not help with the results of your cut.

There's a "definite maybe" if I've ever seen one! Spoken with true
conviction.

Hey! What's that sharp steel thing hanging out of my mouth? What
the?!?!? Heck Leon, are you fishing again? Geez! Can't a guy offer
some helpful assistance without getting trolled? I didn't suggest
that he buy anything. With regard to his setup I said: "That will do
the trick...". Is that what you Texas boys call the "hard sell"?

Ed Bennett
[email protected]

http://www.ts-aligner.com
Home of the TS-Aligner

Followup:

Returned the 'Silver' coated Avanti blade and ordered a 50T Frued
Diablo. Probably not as good as a WWII but half the price. I am also
very happy with the 80T Diablo I have, cuts great and will easily rip
3/4" Maple even though it is not made to do so.

Checked the runout on my arbor, barely perceptible ~0.00015. Good.

Checked the runout on the flange and at first it was ~0.0015! Then I
noticed that even touching the belt caused the needle to jump
(contractor saw). So I took the belt off and the flange runout is
~0.0003 after a little touch up with emery cloth, good enough for me.

Put the original 28T Jet blade on that made maybe three cuts in its
life and the blade runout was 0.005! WTF? Spun it 180 and now the
runout was 0.001. Spun it back and runout was 0.002? Took the blade
off to see that it was scratched/smutzed up. Emery clothed it and now
the runout is around 0.001 in any position (without the belt). I'm
satisfied the saw is OK and the Avanti blade was a POS.

OK, so is all this checking worth it? I think it is, it takes maybe
five minutes to check the runout of a newly mounted blade. Well worth
it to find out that an errant wood chip got stuck between the blade
and the flange making a smooth cut nearly impossible. I plan to keep
the dial indicator in a much handier spot. That way I can check a
blade that has been lying around for a year with an Allen wrech under
one side and a stacked dado set sitting on top of it ;-).

Enough measuring, I need sleep so I can make some sawdust tomorrow.

On Oct 15, 9:36 am, RayV <[email protected]> wrote:
> My latest project requires me to rip some 1 1/2" Maple so I deicded to
> check blade alignment.
>
> I cobbled together a jig similar to thishttp://www.newwoodworker.com/dilindjig.html
> to check my setup

Do any PM 66 owners here know the tolerances of their
saws? I aligned my humble Delta contractor's saw with
that jig, and it cuts easier than any 66 I've ever seen. I
think I got the blade parallel to the slot to within 0.002".

On Oct 15, 8:47 pm, klaatu <[email protected]> wrote:


Verata Nictu? Necktie?

On Oct 16, 12:20 am, "Leon" <[email protected]> wrote:
> "The Davenport's" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>
> news:[email protected]...
>
> >> Good point, but to answer the question, NO ONE does that.
>
> > (raising hand in a grade school manner...) I do.
>
> I think Jow was refering to ripping a board to width 3" +, - .001"
> If you are doing "that", don't remeasure today's rip tomorrow. :~)

Yeah, rilly.

On Oct 15, 10:13 pm, Ferd Farkel <[email protected]> wrote:
> Do any PM 66 owners here know the tolerances of their
> saws? I aligned my humble Delta contractor's saw with
> that jig, and it cuts easier than any 66 I've ever seen. I
> think I got the blade parallel to the slot to within 0.002".

I don't happen to have a PM66 handy right now, but I'm very familiar
with it. It's a fine machine. I wouldn't mind trading in my Unisaw
for one. I wouldn't trade one for any contractor's saw. If it isn't
aligned properly, the best table saw can perform much worse than an
everyday humble contractor's saw. I know for a fact that there are a
lot of real cheap junkers out there outperforming high end cabinet
saws. Alignment does make a difference.

When I look at comparative reviews of machinery, the first thing I
look for is a description of how the machine was prepared. Most
reviewers ignore alignment completely. Some check the "factory"
alignment in a misguided (ignorant) attempt to judge the quality of
workmanship. I don't think I've seen a reviewer pay attention to
setup and alignment since Kelly Mehler's table saw review in the April
2003 edition of Woodworker's Journal. You can't make valid
comparisons between two machines until they are both properly setup
and aligned. Glad to see that Kelly understood this - wish more did.

Ed Bennett
[email protected]

http://www.ts-aligner.com
Home of the TS-Aligner

On Oct 16, 1:29 pm, Ed Bennett <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Oct 15, 10:13 pm, Ferd Farkel <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Do any PM 66 owners here know the tolerances of their
> > saws? I aligned my humble Delta contractor's saw with
> > that jig, and it cuts easier than any 66 I've ever seen. I
> > think I got the blade parallel to the slot to within 0.002".
>
> I don't happen to have a PM66 handy right now, but I'm very familiar
> with it. It's a fine machine. I wouldn't mind trading in my Unisaw
> for one. I wouldn't trade one for any contractor's saw. If it isn't
> aligned properly, the best table saw can perform much worse than an
> everyday humble contractor's saw. I know for a fact that there are a
> lot of real cheap junkers out there outperforming high end cabinet
> saws. Alignment does make a difference.

The 66 is a great machine, made for shops that turn
it on at 8 AM and off at 5.

> When I look at comparative reviews of machinery, the first thing I
> look for is a description of how the machine was prepared. Most
> reviewers ignore alignment completely. Some check the "factory"
> alignment in a misguided (ignorant) attempt to judge the quality of
> workmanship. I don't think I've seen a reviewer pay attention to
> setup and alignment since Kelly Mehler's table saw review in the April
> 2003 edition of Woodworker's Journal. You can't make valid
> comparisons between two machines until they are both properly setup
> and aligned. Glad to see that Kelly understood this - wish more did.

I aligned my Delta for safety, with the rear trunnion bolts upgraded
to
PALS brackets. Improved cut quality is a welcome side benefit.

> When I look at comparative reviews of machinery, the first thing I
> look for is a description of how the machine was prepared. Most
> reviewers ignore alignment completely. Some check the "factory"
> alignment in a misguided (ignorant) attempt to judge the quality of
> workmanship. I don't think I've seen a reviewer pay attention to
> setup and alignment since Kelly Mehler's table saw review in the April
> 2003 edition of Woodworker's Journal. You can't make valid
> comparisons between two machines until they are both properly setup
> and aligned. Glad to see that Kelly understood this - wish more did.


factory setup is a relevant data point, in that it indicates how much
care the Mfr. puts into final stage QC., less shipping jostling. the
shipping is the real bugger for factory setup... you're always gonna
have to do some alignment to a machine that has been moved. a good
argument can be made that the consumer benefits more from the effort
and QC. going somewhere other than into factory alignment, but it also
can be argued that the production line that aligns each and every saw
will have a better handle on and more interest in all of the upstream
precision machining processes.


me, I mostly buy old machines anyway, so factory alignment is kinda a
moot point in my shop.

On Oct 17, 8:34 pm, [email protected] wrote:
> factory setup is a relevant data point, in that it indicates how much
> care the Mfr. puts into final stage QC., less shipping jostling. the
> shipping is the real bugger for factory setup... you're always gonna
> have to do some alignment to a machine that has been moved. a good
> argument can be made that the consumer benefits more from the effort
> and QC. going somewhere other than into factory alignment, but it also
> can be argued that the production line that aligns each and every saw
> will have a better handle on and more interest in all of the upstream
> precision machining processes.
>
> me, I mostly buy old machines anyway, so factory alignment is kinda a
> moot point in my shop.

I think it's important for the factory to test machinery before it
ships. And, you can't tell if a machine is operating properly
(accurately) unless it's aligned. Aligning it at the factory also
proves that it can be aligned. You would be amazed at the number of
customers who call me to say that they cannot move the trunnions
enough to obtain proper blade alignment because the castings are so
far out of whack. My own unisaw was incapable of blade tilt all the
way to 45 degrees as delivered. I had to go after the castings with a
file (as recommended by the tech support guy) before it worked
properly.

It's not very reasonable to expect that a machine can maintain proper
alignment after riding around on fork lifts, in trucks, and on rail
cars. The amount of vibration and thermal variation that it receives
would challenge the skills of even the best engineers to come up with
ways to maintain alignment. It would be a waste of time and money to
implement such countermeasures to ensure that factory alignment was
maintained during shipping. If a manufacturer really wants to ensure
the best customer experience, then they should sell through dealers
who provide accurate setup and alignment at no extra charge. But, in
this "big box" retail world, it's not a very practical option.

In the 16 years that I've been making TS-Aligners (many thousands of
units), I think I've heard from only 3-4 customers who said that their
machine was accurately aligned from the factory. I chalk it up to
pure luck.

Ed Bennett
[email protected]

http://www.ts-aligner.com
Home of the TS-Aligner

On Oct 17, 3:46 pm, Frank Boettcher <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Oct 2007 10:29:16 -0700, Ed Bennett <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> > Some check the "factory"
> >alignment in a misguided (ignorant) attempt to judge the quality of
> >workmanship.
>
> >Ed Bennett
> >[email protected]
>
> >http://www.ts-aligner.com
> >Home of the TS-Aligner
>
> An insulting and misleading statement. Leads the reader to consider
> that there is no basis for quality judgement and comparison from the
> alignment done on the assembly line by the manufacturer.

I don't know why anybody would take offense Frank. I really don't
think it's reasonable to expect a machine to maintain proper alignment
after riding around on forklifts, trucks, and rail cars. The
vibrations and thermal changes virtually guarantee that alignment will
be lost during shipping. If I were personally responsible for
aligning and testing table saws at the end of a production line I
would not be surprised or offended to learn that 99.9% of the machines
that I so carefully aligned arrived completely out of whack. It's
just physics. My Unisaw needed alignment, and it came with a bunch of
"shock watch" tags on it.

I think a manufacturer cannot verify that a machine is defect free
until they properly align and test it. And, the quality can be
clearly judged inferior if a machine cannot be properly aligned. But,
the state of alignment as delivered "out of the box" is pretty much
irrelevant.

> The truth is unless the component parts are just terrible, all saws
> can be "set" to very close to zero at 90 degrees and I suspect that
> most manufacturers have assembly procedures that achieve that using
> rather sophisticated set up tools. I know one does at least. As the
> blade is tilted, it is exactly the "quality of the workmanship" of the
> component parts that determines the reading at 45 degrees and the
> difference between the two figures is an excellent indicator of the
> quality of workmanship when comparing different units. The flatter
> the table, the more parallel the boss plane to the top, the flatter
> the cabinet top plate plane, the more accurate the trunnion/brackets,
> yoke assembly and arbor assembly, the closer that 45 degree figure
> will stay to zero out of the box.

I agree, there are certain aspects of alignment (like the tilt axis
parallelism to the table top that you mention here) that are dependent
on quality of manufacture. It would be incredibly easy (and
inexpensive) to implement in-process 100% inspection of every single
casting that gets machined. And, the use of the Meehanite casting
process would significantly reduce (eliminate) post machining
warpage. I suspect that only an exceptional manufacturer would do
such things. And, if they really did, then I would expect that none
of their saws would require shimming under the trunnions or between
the base and the table (or, such a small number that you would just
never hear about it).

Having heard of this problem from owners of all the most popular
brands, I suspect that they really aren't doing anything substantial
in this area. My 80's vintage "Proudly made in the USA" Unisaw needed
shimming (among things) before it would operate properly. So,
whatever Delta did before shipping my machine, it didn't help much.

> While there are certain things you
> can do to offset the tolerance stackup of some of those parts if
> others are bad "you got what you got".

This might be how I "got what I got" with my Unisaw. If the
tolerances stack up so that the product (when fully assembled) can not
be properly aligned (without shimming, filing, or other
modifications), then any mechanical engineer will tell you that the
manufacturing process is poorly designed. Tolerances are *supposed*
to define the range of variability for which no defect can occur.
Unfortunately, too many manufacturers define their tolerances as the
range of variability for which an affordable amount of warranty
expense occurs. I'm in the "zero defect" camp, not the "acceptable
warranty liability" camp - which never made me very popular with the
bean-counter types. They were always glad that I only did the
numbers, not the decisions.

Ed Bennett
[email protected]

http://www.ts-aligner.com
Home of the TS-Aligner

On Oct 18, 1:43 pm, Frank Boettcher <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Thu, 18 Oct 2007 12:15:02 -0700, Ed Bennett <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> <all snipped>
>
> My mistake Ed. I should have assumed you would not see the offense.
> But the mistake was mine. I should never have reacted. It offered you
> another chance to extend your not so subtle spam campaign. Won't
> happen again.
>
> Frank

I still don't see it Frank. Why don't you explain it? The comment
wasn't directed at any particular person, company, or machine. It was
a comment about some who do machinery reviews without any technical
expertise. Did you author such a review article?

Why does a guy who proudly declares that he has never checked the
alignment of his saw get offended when someone says that it's pretty
ignorant to judge the quality of a machine by the accuracy of it's
factory alignment?

Why does a guy who says "just make sawdust" to someone who wants to
correct misalignment in their saw get so offended when someone says
that it's pretty ignorant to judge the quality of a machine by the
accuracy of it's factory alignment?

I think my Unisaw is a great machine. I have been real hard on it for
about 20 years and it's still amazingly accurate. I didn't expect it
to be well aligned "right out of the box" and it wasn't. If I had
been so misguided, I might have concluded that it was a poor quality
machine. That would have been a big mistake on my part. Ya, it took
some filing and some shimming to get it fully aligned but It was a one-
time event so I didn't make such a big deal out of it. I share that
info here with the hope that I can steer others clear of making such
an ignorant misjudgement of quality.

If there's real cause for offense, then you know that I will
appologize - and it won't be one of those backhanded "...if there was
something I said.." BS appologies. And I'll do it without any
expectation of reciprocation (in spite of the "spam campaign" comment,
which was intended as an insult).

Just explain why you are personally insulted when someone says that
the quality of a machine should not be judged by the accuracy of its
factory alignment.

Ed Bennett
[email protected]

http://www.ts-aligner.com
Home of the TS-Aligner.com

On Oct 18, 5:44 pm, Maxwell Lol <[email protected]> wrote:
> I think you should has said "alignment when received by the customer."
>
> In Frank's case, the poor alignment was not the fault of the factory,
> which Frank was personally involved with. Yet your phrase appears to
> place the blame squarely on the factory.

Hmmm... I suppose I can see your point...sort-of. I have been using
"factory alignment" interchangably with "out of the box". I didn't
think that there would be any confusion - especially since I explained
in great detail how the factory alignment gets disturbed. And, since
I also explained why factory alignment is important (to properly test
the machine) I'm still left wondering how he could have taken offense
- especially since he's made it pretty clear that he thinks alignment
is not worth bothering with.

I pretty much want to stick to the statement that Frank quoted and
find out why he felt that it was so "insulting and misleading". It
was a commentary about people who do a poor job evaluating the quality
of a machine, not on the company or the employees that produce the
machine. Would he prefer that I conclude that my Unisaw, and the saws
of 99% of my customers are low quality just because they didn't arrive
with good alignment? I think that would be much more misleading and
insulting (not to mention ignorant).

There really was no insult intended in my statement. I cannot imagine
the connection between Frank and reviewers who judge a machine's
quality by it's "as arrived" alignment. If he does take it as an
insult to his work and the company that he works for, then maybe he
should consider how his intentionally insulting comments have affected
others.

Ed Bennett
[email protected]

http://www.ts-aligner.com
Home of the TS-Aligner

On Oct 19, 7:05 am, Maxwell Lol <[email protected]> wrote:
> Ed Bennett <[email protected]> writes:
> >I'm still left wondering how he could have taken offense
> > - especially since he's made it pretty clear that he thinks alignment
> > is not worth bothering with.
>
> No no no! That's not what I understand.

In another thread ("Trouble setting up new table saw") a guy named Dan
was trying to resolve an alignment problem. Frank advised him that it
wasn't worth bothering over. "lock it down" and "just make sawdust".
Don't you remember, you happened to disagree with that particular
advice:

http://groups.google.com/group/rec.woodworking/msg/100bf3217a65a571

> His company was responsible for the alignment, and it was done right
> and "WAS worth bothering over."

Ya, that's the rub. Do you now see the contradiction? While Frank
was arguing "just make sawdust" in the "Trouble setting up new table
saw" thread, he knew full well how important alignment really is. To
Dan he says "just make sawdust" but in his job he insists that the
alignment is done right. He gets all bent out of shape if someone
says anything that could possibly be misconstrued as a vague
implication that the factory alignment isn't accurate.

> Well, you basicly said the factory alignment should not be trusted.
> Essentially you said that a reviewer should assume all factories screw
> up. That is a good idea for reviewers, however look at it from
> Frank's perspective.

I didn't say or even imply that the factory had done it wrong. In my
followup I made it abundantly clear why I thought it was folly to
judge a saw's quality based on it's "out of the box" alignment. I'm
sorry that Frank has put himself through this torture over his
misunderstanding of my statement. It was not meant to disparage his
company or any other company. It was meant to disparage clueless
reviewers. They should first make sure the machine is properly
aligned and then start to pass judgement on its quality, accuracy, and
performance. Unfortunately, you don't see this too often because it
requires the reviewer to possess some knowledge and expertise.

> Frank's company's goal was to product high quality tools and maintain
> their reputation. By lumping Frank's company in the same category as
> the Harbor Freight class of tools, you essentially told him his
> company, and therefore Frank, was incompetent.

Woah there just a minute Max. I never lumped any companies in with
any other companies. I made no comparisons between brands or makes of
any machines. I never said anything about the competence of Frank,
his company, or anybody making any machinery. This is some major leap
that your are making here that just doesn't jive with reality.

> No wonder he got insulted.

Actually, I have his "explanation" for why he got "insulted". We've
exchanged some email (not that it accomplished anything). I'll do my
best to try and explain it in an even handed manner.

Frank feels that I'm a charlatan, a phony. He even went so far as to
call me a liar. In his opinion, I give "erroneous information about
all manufacturers". According to his email, he finds me "misleading
and despicable" and this is why he thinks my statement was
"insulting". Every time he responds to my messages with what he
considers factual information, it gives me "another opportunity to
drop another thousand words of erroneous information, followed by [my]
spam link." He says that I prey on the "uninformed".

Frank honestly believes that the factory alignment survives the
shipping process 100% of the time. Everyone who buys a new saw should
expect it to be accurately aligned right out of the box. Shipping
can't cause it to go out of whack - even on machines that are returned
with freight damage. And, according to Frank's email, neither can
usage. He's got a box full of "marketing research data" that proves
this to be true. He has never and will never check the alignment on
his table saw because he firmly believes that there is no need. To
say anything different is to disparage a manufacturer's reputation for
quality.

I'm not sure where that puts Dan and the misalignment that I helped
him to correct. Or the thousands of other customers of mine who
proclaim how much better their saw works since they have been able to
align it properly. Where does that put all the other manufacturers of
alignment tools? How about all those authors of books and magazine
articles which talk about table saw alignment. These people must all
be charlatans and phonies too. Hmmmm.....at least I'm in good
company!

Ed Bennett
[email protected]

http://www.ts-aligner.com
Home of the TS-Aligner

in an ideal world all shipping variables can be taken into account. in
the real world, shipments get tossed around by storms at sea, pallets
get left out in the rain and boxes get dropped. the higher degree of
precision the factory setup the more susceptible it is to change- any
change, even temperature swings. now, generally woodworking equipment
isn't the most precise stuff around, and I'm sure the manufacturers do
cost- benefit analyses of precision factory setup among other things
and find a happy medium. then we as users tweak the machines to our
individual requirements, even using aftermarket parts and devices. no
prob (TM Joat) everybody gets what they need and a thriving economy
exists based on table saw alignment devices.

very few precision machines arrive from the manufacturer plug and play
at their optimum performance, and the ones that *must* do so come with
a tech from the factory to do the setup.

On Oct 15, 10:10 am, "Edwin Pawlowski" <[email protected]> wrote:
> "RayV" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>
> > Is 0.001" alignment close enough?
> > Is 0.003" blade runout too much?
> > Is it OK to have the dial indicator angled so the measurement can be
> > taken closer to the table or does it need to be 90deg?
> > (as seen here, but not my site)
> >http://home.comcast.net/~kvaughn65/dial_indicator.jpg
>
> When I get home I'm going to make some popcorn and ice my favorite adult
> beverage to sustain me while the results come in on this one.

You're right Ed, very interesting (entertaining?) thread this has
turned out to be...

On Oct 22, 9:47 am, RayV <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Oct 15, 10:10 am, "Edwin Pawlowski" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > "RayV" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>
> > > Is 0.001" alignment close enough?
> > > Is 0.003" blade runout too much?
> > > Is it OK to have the dial indicator angled so the measurement can be
> > > taken closer to the table or does it need to be 90deg?
> > > (as seen here, but not my site)
> > >http://home.comcast.net/~kvaughn65/dial_indicator.jpg
>
> > When I get home I'm going to make some popcorn and ice my favorite adult
> > beverage to sustain me while the results come in on this one.
>
> You're right Ed, very interesting (entertaining?) thread this has
> turned out to be...

Yep, Ed's been around long enough to see this happen dozens of times.
>From what you said in response, it would appear that my comments
helped you. That's all I wanted to do - lend some of my expertise to
help you out. I didn't try to sell you anything. I didn't say
anything that I didn't believe to be absolutely true. I didn't say
anything with the intent to insult anybody. But, this happens in
virtually every single thread that I offer technical advice in. And,
it's usually instigated by the same group of people (at one point or
another, most of them chimed in on this thread).

I hope you find your dial indicator useful and a lot easier than a
bevel blade attached to the miter bar ;-). Don't let the ignorant
hecklers discourage you from using your brain. Thinking people can be
real woodworkers - they just have to endure a lot of taunting and
heckling.

Ed Bennett
[email protected]

http://www.ts-aligner.com
Home of the TS-Aligner

RayV wrote:

> The runout measuered on the body of the blade is 0.003". I think this
> is too much but it could be the 'silver' coating on the Avanti blade I
> just bought.

Personally, I'd consider that just fine. Before you judge any test rip
cuts, you should also ensure that your fence is parallel to the blade
and the mitre slot.

Chris

Joe AutoDrill wrote:

> Just thinking out loud - How many people do you know that measure wood to
> .001" or so?

When fitting joints with a hand plane, it's fairly easy to take off a
thou or two at a time. It's not so much measured as felt though...your
fingertips can feel .003" fairly easily, it's roughly the thickness of a
piece of paper.

Chris

Leon wrote:
> Where is there to go Frank? I was only pointing out that a
> manufacturers responsibility is and the "Fact" that Delta had
> problems with broken trunions. Why they had problems is beside the
> point as far as their target audience is concerned.

Not particularly true......as a consumer if a product has a particular
design flaw or simply suffers from inept shipping it is of note. Even
significant if down the road one must move the saw to another location one
might need to know shipping precautions. On the other hand if said expensive
product has a particular design flaw a replacement part may still leave you
with a soon to expire machine just past warrantee......why does indeed
matter.

Rod


.

"RayV" wrote in message

> The runout measuered on the body of the blade is 0.003". I think this
> is too much but it could be the 'silver' coating on the Avanti blade I
> just bought.

Your measurements are only as accurate as the instrument you used to do the
measuring.
>
> Is 0.001" alignment close enough?

If you mean the blade aligned to the miter slot, that real good. + .005 and
it's generally considered that you have problems that need to be addressed

Are you sure that indeed measured "blade runout"/warp/flatness, and your
measurement does not arbor or flange runout also?

There is a specific procedure for checking the flatness of a blade with that
type of instrument:

With the instrument, find and mark the high spot on the blade; loosen the
nut and turn the blade 1/2 turn on the arbor; re-tighten the nut check for
the high spot again; if the high spot coincides with the marked spot, then
the it's due to blade warp, if not, then it's arbor or flange runout.

Arbor and flange runout on a good table saw should be less than .001"

I'm sure you'll get a lot more responses ... :)

--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 9/30/07
KarlC@ (the obvious)

On Thu, 18 Oct 2007 08:02:01 -0500, "Leon"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>
><[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>>
>
>>
>>
>> factory setup is a relevant data point, in that it indicates how much
>> care the Mfr. puts into final stage QC., less shipping jostling. the
>> shipping is the real bugger for factory setup... you're always gonna
>> have to do some alignment to a machine that has been moved.
>
>I'll have to respectfully disagree with you here. A company that does not
>take measures to insure that a product is delivered in the same shape it
>leaves the factory has no "real" QC as far as the customer is concerned.
>What really matters is that the sale is completed with a product that is
>delivered in the same shape that it leaves the factory. Blaming the
>shipping company is a pittyful excuse and is simply dropping the ball where
>the customer is concerned. If the manufacturer does not package, package
>properly for shipping, and monitor the shipper to insure delivery of
>undamaged products it may as well nave no QC at all. Ignoring those facts
>is what has gotten many of them in the jam that they are in today.
>Sorry to mention this again Frank, Delta had a problem with broken trunions
>on their Unisaws some 10 years ago. Does it really matter why the trunion
>arrived broken? The consumer saw a product that was broken. That was the
>#1 reason I chose the Jet over the Delta when I bought 7-8 years ago. The
>Delta setting on the show room floor with the "broken tag" attached to the
>top was not inviting. The saw looked fine.

And since you mentioned it again I'll reiterate the facts. As a
percentage of units shipped a small number of units were damaged in
shipment in a way that caused trunions to break. Extensivel testing
determined that what caused the breakage was a full running tipover
where the unit was slammed over on a concrete dock or tipped out of a
warehouse rack. I seriously doubt that any "packaging" would have
stopped that from happening, but in any event, you as a consumer would
not want to pay for it. When a rather expensive improper handling
device was added to the packaging, the problem went away. Your
distributor, who left a broken unit on his floor did not have to.
Delta was allowing immediate freight allowed RMA's and replacement
units for any damaged units as they did for any type of damage. Why
your distributor chose to keep the saw is a mystery to me. No end
user customer was ever "stuck" with a unit that had broken trunions.
If the distributor had used the RMA process, you as a consumer, would
not have had the opportunity to see the broken tag.

Your comment about "may as well have no QC at all" is insulting to
those involved with it and is, of course, your opinion with full right
to express it on an open forum

Frank
>
>My Jet cabinet saw was delivered with no adjustment needed after factory
>alignment, that goes for my Laguna BS, and Delta stationary planer.
>
>
>
>

"David Todtman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:aYSQi.66141$th2.25985@pd7urf3no...
> Leon,
> Why do you recommend "regular kerf"? (I presume this is rather than
> "thin" kerf.) I have been told that one should not use a thin kerf blade
> on a 3hp cabinet saw but don't know if this is bs or what.
> Best,
> David


I used thin kerf for years because they cut so "fast". I was not happy with
the cuts. They were never quite true enough for me and even with a
stiffener which limited the depth of cut I was not happy. In 1989 I talked
to my local tool dealer and blade sharpener. They still sharpen blades but
do not sell tools. I asked what he recommended for a good combination
blade. He recommended a Systematic combo "Regular Kerf".
He told me, and I agree with that statement to this day that a "good quality
and sharp" regular kerf blade will cut just as smoothly and effortlessly as
any thin kerf blade. Plus you get flat bevels, miters, and compound bevel
cuts. At the time I was using a 1 hp Craftsman TS and never again put a
thin kerf blade on my saw. About 8 years ago I up graded to a 3 hp cabinet
saw and immediately upgraded to the Forrest WWII regular kerf 40 tooth
blade. A few years ago I bought another Forrest WWII to have on hand while
Forrest resharpens the other. I also strongly recommend Forrest for
resharpening. They can retune the blade if necessary when they resharpen
it.
If you are buying a cheap blade, a thin kerf may be the better choice but if
you have your sat properly set up and want dead flat cuts a "Quality"
regular kerf blade is the way to go.
Thin kerf makes it easier for a low powered saw cut through hard woods. A
sharp good quality regular kerf blade can do this also.

As for why you should not use a thin kerf blade on a 3hp saw, probably
because the blade will not deliver the precision that a better quality saw
is capable of delivering.

Ed Bennett <[email protected]> writes:

> Just explain why you are personally insulted when someone says that
> the quality of a machine should not be judged by the accuracy of its
> factory alignment.

I think you should has said "alignment when received by the customer."

In Frank's case, the poor alignment was not the fault of the factory,
which Frank was personally involved with. Yet your phrase appears to
place the blame squarely on the factory.

Ed Bennett <[email protected]> writes:

>I'm still left wondering how he could have taken offense
> - especially since he's made it pretty clear that he thinks alignment
> is not worth bothering with.

No no no! That's not what I understand.

His company was responsible for the alignment, and it was done right
and "WAS worth bothering over."

> I pretty much want to stick to the statement that Frank quoted and
> find out why he felt that it was so "insulting and misleading". It
> was a commentary about people who do a poor job evaluating the quality
> of a machine, not on the company or the employees that produce the
> machine.

Well, you basicly said the factory alignment should not be trusted.
Essentially you said that a reviewer should assume all factories screw
up. That is a good idea for reviewers, however look at it from
Frank's perspective.

Frank's company's goal was to product high quality tools and maintain
their reputation. By lumping Frank's company in the same category as
the Harbor Freight class of tools, you essentially told him his
company, and therefore Frank, was incompetent.

No wonder he got insulted.

RayV wrote:
>
> Is 0.001" alignment close enough?
> Is 0.003" blade runout too much?

How do test rips look?

"RayV" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>
> Is 0.001" alignment close enough?
> Is 0.003" blade runout too much?
> Is it OK to have the dial indicator angled so the measurement can be
> taken closer to the table or does it need to be 90deg?
> (as seen here, but not my site)
> http://home.comcast.net/~kvaughn65/dial_indicator.jpg

When I get home I'm going to make some popcorn and ice my favorite adult
beverage to sustain me while the results come in on this one.

"RayV" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Oct 15, 10:38 am, B A R R Y <[email protected]> wrote:
>> RayV wrote:
>>
>> > Is 0.001" alignment close enough?
>> > Is 0.003" blade runout too much?
>>
>> How do test rips look?
>
> Hard to tell, I went looking for a decent combination blade over the
> weekend but couldn't find one. The Avanti (50T $30) blade cuts right
> through Maple but leaves hatchet marks. I will stop at the Lumberyard
> today and see what they have, I will probably end up ordering one of
> these:
> http://www.forrestsawbladesonline.com/category_2_Woodworker_II.html
>

You can typically rule the blade out with that one but be sure to get the
"regular kerf" blade.

"Frank Boettcher" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Thu, 18 Oct 2007 14:53:59 GMT, "Leon"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
> Please excuse my top post,no offense is intended, but I've been down
> this road with you many times over about a five year period. Not
> going there again. Any one interested can google away. I will
> always just single post respond when you bring it up, provide a
> brief outline of the facts, let anyone who reads make up their minds.
>
> Frank


Where is there to go Frank? I was only pointing out that a manufacturers
responsibility is and the "Fact" that Delta had problems with broken
trunions. Why they had problems is beside the point as far as their target
audience is concerned. Ultimately Delta made changes to lessen the
problem, right?
And to be fair, Delta was not the only company that had shipping problems.
Grizzly had a tremendous problem with their shipper several years back.
Apparently they too have taken steps to correct the problem.

"Joe AutoDrill" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:TFLQi.5768$2o1.4756@trnddc03...
> "RayV" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> Not being an avid woodworker or someone with much time using a table
> saw... I'm guessing that unless this adversely affects the chances of a
> kickback, it shouldn't cause any real problems...
>
> Just thinking out loud - How many people do you know that measure wood to
> .001" or so?
>

Good point, but to answer the question, NO ONE does that.
However the closer to perfect you get the blade to being parallel to the
fence or perpendicular to the miter slot the less sanding you have to do.
Typically I NEVER have to sand a ripped or mitered cut.

You do not need fancy measuring equipment to set the saw up to make cuts
like that. For some the measuring equipment makes it easier. For some it
is an extra and unnecessary step. Results will tell you if the saw is set
up right or not.

"Leon" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Joe AutoDrill" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:TFLQi.5768$2o1.4756@trnddc03...
>> "RayV" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> Not being an avid woodworker or someone with much time using a table
>> saw... I'm guessing that unless this adversely affects the chances of a
>> kickback, it shouldn't cause any real problems...
>>
>> Just thinking out loud - How many people do you know that measure wood to
>> .001" or so?
>>
>
> Good point, but to answer the question, NO ONE does that.

(raising hand in a grade school manner...) I do.

I will be the first to admit that I go overboard, but since I work to .0001
or so during the day, going to a .001 or so, doesn't seem like that big of a
stretch.

> However the closer to perfect you get the blade to being parallel to the
> fence or perpendicular to the miter slot the less sanding you have to do.
> Typically I NEVER have to sand a ripped or mitered cut.

Absolutely...if you don't get the machine accurate, the part can NOT be
accurate without fiddling with something somewhere....easier to do it on the
first operation, I think.
>
> You do not need fancy measuring equipment to set the saw up to make cuts
> like that. For some the measuring equipment makes it easier. For some it
> is an extra and unnecessary step. Results will tell you if the saw is set
> up right or not.

Also very right...the finish of the ripped board is what counts...assuming
that you'll make an adjustment if the size is off, if the finish is there,
that's most of the battle.

Mike

RayV wrote:
> On Oct 15, 10:38 am, B A R R Y <[email protected]> wrote:
>> RayV wrote:
>>
>>> Is 0.001" alignment close enough?
>>> Is 0.003" blade runout too much?
>> How do test rips look?
>
> Hard to tell, I went looking for a decent combination blade over the
> weekend but couldn't find one. The Avanti (50T $30) blade cuts right
> through Maple but leaves hatchet marks. I will stop at the Lumberyard
> today and see what they have, I will probably end up ordering one of
> these:
> http://www.forrestsawbladesonline.com/category_2_Woodworker_II.html
>

I love my WWII's, but a 24T rip blade is easier to use on thicker stock.
When I have more than a few rips to do, I take the time to install the
rip blade.

I've had Freud, CMT, and Ridge Carbide rip blades that I liked.

"RayV" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> My latest project requires me to rip some 1 1/2" Maple so I deicded to
> check blade alignment.
>
> I cobbled together a jig similar to this
> http://www.newwoodworker.com/dilindjig.html
> to check my setup
>
> My alignment, which I think is OK, is 0.001". Not bad considering I
> used this method to align my blade
> http://www.woodmagazine.com/wood/story.jsp?storyid=/templatedata/wood/story/data/1161878021156.xml&catref=wd146
> (whoever came up with that technique is a genius)
>
> The runout measuered on the body of the blade is 0.003". I think this
> is too much but it could be the 'silver' coating on the Avanti blade I
> just bought.
>
> Is 0.001" alignment close enough?
> Is 0.003" blade runout too much?
> Is it OK to have the dial indicator angled so the measurement can be
> taken closer to the table or does it need to be 90deg?
> (as seen here, but not my site)
> http://home.comcast.net/~kvaughn65/dial_indicator.jpg

Not being an avid woodworker or someone with much time using a table saw...
I'm guessing that unless this adversely affects the chances of a kickback,
it shouldn't cause any real problems...

Just thinking out loud - How many people do you know that measure wood to
.001" or so?

But I'm here to learn so I'll wait for the experts to answer.

Regards,
Joe Agro, Jr.
(800) 871-5022
01.908.542.0244
Automatic / Pneumatic Drills: http://www.AutoDrill.com
Multiple Spindle Drills: http://www.Multi-Drill.com

V8013-R

"dpb" wrote in message

> Just let it be, please...

The "Reality Distortion Machine", once started, must obfuscate, and insult
with innuendo, ad infinitum. Thunderbird has a "blocked sender" feature ...
use it and do us all a favor.

Thanks ...

--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 10/17/07
KarlC@ (the obvious)

"Rod & Betty Jo" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

>
> Not particularly true......as a consumer if a product has a particular
> design flaw or simply suffers from inept shipping it is of note. Even
> significant if down the road one must move the saw to another location one
> might need to know shipping precautions.


Well, you simply pack the tool the same way it was shipped. If it shipped
successfully 1 time it should ship sucessfully another time providing you
use a good shipper.

Leon,
Why do you recommend "regular kerf"? (I presume this is rather than "thin"
kerf.) I have been told that one should not use a thin kerf blade on a 3hp
cabinet saw but don't know if this is bs or what.
Best,
David
"Leon" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "RayV" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> On Oct 15, 10:38 am, B A R R Y <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> RayV wrote:
>>>
>>> > Is 0.001" alignment close enough?
>>> > Is 0.003" blade runout too much?
>>>
>>> How do test rips look?
>>
>> Hard to tell, I went looking for a decent combination blade over the
>> weekend but couldn't find one. The Avanti (50T $30) blade cuts right
>> through Maple but leaves hatchet marks. I will stop at the Lumberyard
>> today and see what they have, I will probably end up ordering one of
>> these:
>> http://www.forrestsawbladesonline.com/category_2_Woodworker_II.html
>>
>
> You can typically rule the blade out with that one but be sure to get the
> "regular kerf" blade.
>

----- Original Message -----
From: "Frank Boettcher" <[email protected]>

>>>

> And since you mentioned it again I'll reiterate the facts. As a
> percentage of units shipped a small number of units were damaged in
> shipment in a way that caused trunions to break. Extensivel testing
> determined that what caused the breakage was a full running tipover
> where the unit was slammed over on a concrete dock or tipped out of a
> warehouse rack. I seriously doubt that any "packaging" would have
> stopped that from happening, but in any event, you as a consumer would
> not want to pay for it. When a rather expensive improper handling
> device was added to the packaging, the problem went away.

Exactly, Delta recognised the problem and provided a fix rather than let it
continue.

Your
> distributor, who left a broken unit on his floor did not have to.
> Delta was allowing immediate freight allowed RMA's and replacement
> units for any damaged units as they did for any type of damage. Why
> your distributor chose to keep the saw is a mystery to me. No end
> user customer was ever "stuck" with a unit that had broken trunions.
> If the distributor had used the RMA process, you as a consumer, would
> not have had the opportunity to see the broken tag.

I don't know the details however the distrubutor did indicate that they had
been waiting for Delta to send a replacement trunion. The saw looked
factory freah and IIRC the distributor has 20+ stores in Texas. Perhaps
the unit was damaged during delivery to the store vs perhaps from a
warehouse. I do recall mentioning the problem with the saw way back when
and was actually contacted by a Delta rep inquiring where this saw was
located so that the parts could be delivered. He did not mention that the
saw would be exchanged. Time may have been a decising factor.

>
> Your comment about "may as well have no QC at all" is insulting to
> those involved with it and is, of course, your opinion with full right
> to express it on an open forum

Well Frank, a comment that may be perceived as an insult to some is often
perceived as a unique opportunity to fix a problem by others. Excuses do
not fix problems.
Those that act on that valuable information tend to stay in
business and or not get sold every few years.

You should absolutely not take offense if you were not responsible.

It can be said that it is equally insulting to the buyer when the
manufacturer defends a product and
or its manufacturing and delivery by blaiming how the product was handled.
WHO chooses the shipping company? The dealer/consumer does not care, as the
fact remains that the equipment is in no condition to be used. No one but
the manufacturer is responsable for its merchandise and how it arrives
because they are the only ones that can do something different to remedy the
problem. Ultimately the manufacturer needs to eat a slice of humble pie
and get with the program, catch up with the competition, and deliver what
the buyer expects to get. Imagine going to a new car dealership with 1% of
the vehicles coming off of the deliveries trucks being wrecked badly enough
that it cannot be sold. For the average dealership in Houston that would be
1 to 2 vehicles every week. It probably happens but in the 10 years that I
worked for an automobile dealership I never saw it happen. GM used to have
a terrible problem with damaged parts deliveries. They switched to a
dedicated carrier with equipment specifically designed to deliver auto parts
and sheet metal with out damage. They may have considered it an insult when
we dealership managers complained about the quality of the packaging and
delivery process however we never heard complaints from GM.

On Thu, 18 Oct 2007 14:53:59 GMT, "Leon"
<[email protected]> wrote:


Please excuse my top post,no offense is intended, but I've been down
this road with you many times over about a five year period. Not
going there again. Any one interested can google away. I will
always just single post respond when you bring it up, provide a
brief outline of the facts, let anyone who reads make up their minds.

Frank

>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Frank Boettcher" <[email protected]>
>
>>>>
>
>> And since you mentioned it again I'll reiterate the facts. As a
>> percentage of units shipped a small number of units were damaged in
>> shipment in a way that caused trunions to break. Extensivel testing
>> determined that what caused the breakage was a full running tipover
>> where the unit was slammed over on a concrete dock or tipped out of a
>> warehouse rack. I seriously doubt that any "packaging" would have
>> stopped that from happening, but in any event, you as a consumer would
>> not want to pay for it. When a rather expensive improper handling
>> device was added to the packaging, the problem went away.
>
>Exactly, Delta recognised the problem and provided a fix rather than let it
>continue.
>
>Your
>> distributor, who left a broken unit on his floor did not have to.
>> Delta was allowing immediate freight allowed RMA's and replacement
>> units for any damaged units as they did for any type of damage. Why
>> your distributor chose to keep the saw is a mystery to me. No end
>> user customer was ever "stuck" with a unit that had broken trunions.
>> If the distributor had used the RMA process, you as a consumer, would
>> not have had the opportunity to see the broken tag.
>
>I don't know the details however the distrubutor did indicate that they had
>been waiting for Delta to send a replacement trunion. The saw looked
>factory freah and IIRC the distributor has 20+ stores in Texas. Perhaps
>the unit was damaged during delivery to the store vs perhaps from a
>warehouse. I do recall mentioning the problem with the saw way back when
>and was actually contacted by a Delta rep inquiring where this saw was
>located so that the parts could be delivered. He did not mention that the
>saw would be exchanged. Time may have been a decising factor.
>
>>
>> Your comment about "may as well have no QC at all" is insulting to
>> those involved with it and is, of course, your opinion with full right
>> to express it on an open forum
>
>Well Frank, a comment that may be perceived as an insult to some is often
>perceived as a unique opportunity to fix a problem by others. Excuses do
>not fix problems.
> Those that act on that valuable information tend to stay in
>business and or not get sold every few years.
>
>You should absolutely not take offense if you were not responsible.
>
>It can be said that it is equally insulting to the buyer when the
>manufacturer defends a product and
>or its manufacturing and delivery by blaiming how the product was handled.
>WHO chooses the shipping company? The dealer/consumer does not care, as the
>fact remains that the equipment is in no condition to be used. No one but
>the manufacturer is responsable for its merchandise and how it arrives
>because they are the only ones that can do something different to remedy the
>problem. Ultimately the manufacturer needs to eat a slice of humble pie
>and get with the program, catch up with the competition, and deliver what
>the buyer expects to get. Imagine going to a new car dealership with 1% of
>the vehicles coming off of the deliveries trucks being wrecked badly enough
>that it cannot be sold. For the average dealership in Houston that would be
>1 to 2 vehicles every week. It probably happens but in the 10 years that I
>worked for an automobile dealership I never saw it happen. GM used to have
>a terrible problem with damaged parts deliveries. They switched to a
>dedicated carrier with equipment specifically designed to deliver auto parts
>and sheet metal with out damage. They may have considered it an insult when
>we dealership managers complained about the quality of the packaging and
>delivery process however we never heard complaints from GM.
>

On Mon, 15 Oct 2007 06:36:54 -0700, RayV <[email protected]>
wrote:

>My latest project requires me to rip some 1 1/2" Maple so I deicded to
>check blade alignment.
>
>I cobbled together a jig similar to this
>http://www.newwoodworker.com/dilindjig.html
>to check my setup
>
>My alignment, which I think is OK, is 0.001". Not bad considering I
>used this method to align my blade
>http://www.woodmagazine.com/wood/story.jsp?storyid=/templatedata/wood/story/data/1161878021156.xml&catref=wd146
>(whoever came up with that technique is a genius)
>
>The runout measuered on the body of the blade is 0.003". I think this
>is too much but it could be the 'silver' coating on the Avanti blade I
>just bought.
>
>Is 0.001" alignment close enough?
>Is 0.003" blade runout too much?
>Is it OK to have the dial indicator angled so the measurement can be
>taken closer to the table or does it need to be 90deg?
>(as seen here, but not my site)
>http://home.comcast.net/~kvaughn65/dial_indicator.jpg


I also check the blade for parrallism to the miter slot with the blade
all the way out ( but not on the stop) and down as far as you can and
still get a measurement. The main thing is to not have the blade cut
wood on the back side at any depth of cut .

<[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>

>
>
> factory setup is a relevant data point, in that it indicates how much
> care the Mfr. puts into final stage QC., less shipping jostling. the
> shipping is the real bugger for factory setup... you're always gonna
> have to do some alignment to a machine that has been moved.

I'll have to respectfully disagree with you here. A company that does not
take measures to insure that a product is delivered in the same shape it
leaves the factory has no "real" QC as far as the customer is concerned.
What really matters is that the sale is completed with a product that is
delivered in the same shape that it leaves the factory. Blaming the
shipping company is a pittyful excuse and is simply dropping the ball where
the customer is concerned. If the manufacturer does not package, package
properly for shipping, and monitor the shipper to insure delivery of
undamaged products it may as well nave no QC at all. Ignoring those facts
is what has gotten many of them in the jam that they are in today.
Sorry to mention this again Frank, Delta had a problem with broken trunions
on their Unisaws some 10 years ago. Does it really matter why the trunion
arrived broken? The consumer saw a product that was broken. That was the
#1 reason I chose the Jet over the Delta when I bought 7-8 years ago. The
Delta setting on the show room floor with the "broken tag" attached to the
top was not inviting. The saw looked fine.

My Jet cabinet saw was delivered with no adjustment needed after factory
alignment, that goes for my Laguna BS, and Delta stationary planer.

Ed Bennett <[email protected]> wrote:

: Just explain why you are personally insulted when someone says that
: the quality of a machine should not be judged by the accuracy of its
: factory alignment.



And more to the point, the accuracy of its factory alignment as affected
by its post-factory experiences being shipped across the ocean and
loaded/unloaded on any number of conveyances. Then hauled into
a shop, uncrated, and possibly rolled around out of its crate during assembly.


-- Andy Barss

Ed Bennett wrote:
> On Oct 18, 5:44 pm, Maxwell Lol <[email protected]> wrote:
>> I think you should has said "alignment when received by the customer."
>>
>> In Frank's case, the poor alignment was not the fault of the factory,
>> which Frank was personally involved with. Yet your phrase appears to
>> place the blame squarely on the factory.
>
> Hmmm... I suppose I can see your point...sort-of. ...
> I pretty much want to stick to the statement that Frank quoted and
> find out why he felt that it was so "insulting and misleading". ...

Clearly, because he interpreted as a dig at the manufacturer and has a
long past with one which unfortunately, ended up quite badly.
Nevertheless, he has a lot invested and can't let that go...

Just let it be, please...

--

On Thu, 18 Oct 2007 12:15:02 -0700, Ed Bennett <[email protected]>
wrote:

<all snipped>

My mistake Ed. I should have assumed you would not see the offense.
But the mistake was mine. I should never have reacted. It offered you
another chance to extend your not so subtle spam campaign. Won't
happen again.

Frank

On Tue, 16 Oct 2007 10:29:16 -0700, Ed Bennett <[email protected]>
wrote:

> Some check the "factory"
>alignment in a misguided (ignorant) attempt to judge the quality of
>workmanship.
>
>Ed Bennett
>[email protected]
>
>http://www.ts-aligner.com
>Home of the TS-Aligner

An insulting and misleading statement. Leads the reader to consider
that there is no basis for quality judgement and comparison from the
alignment done on the assembly line by the manufacturer.

The truth is unless the component parts are just terrible, all saws
can be "set" to very close to zero at 90 degrees and I suspect that
most manufacturers have assembly procedures that achieve that using
rather sophisticated set up tools. I know one does at least. As the
blade is tilted, it is exactly the "quality of the workmanship" of the
component parts that determines the reading at 45 degrees and the
difference between the two figures is an excellent indicator of the
quality of workmanship when comparing different units. The flatter
the table, the more parallel the boss plane to the top, the flatter
the cabinet top plate plane, the more accurate the trunnion/brackets,
yoke assembly and arbor assembly, the closer that 45 degree figure
will stay to zero out of the box. While there are certain things you
can do to offset the tolerance stackup of some of those parts if
others are bad "you got what you got".

Frank

"Ed Bennett" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Oct 15, 9:47 am, "Leon" <[email protected]> wrote:
.
>
> This is very true. Most wood just can't hold these sorts of
> tolerances. Even the heat generated by cutting will cause dimensional
> changes on the order of 0.001". But, like you said previously, we're
> not talking about working wood to within a few thousandths of an
> inch. We're talking about aligning a machine. The goal here is to
> make sure that the machine doesn't introduce additional problems
> (beyond those inherent in the wood). You want to avoid having to
> clean-up or re-work something that the machine could have done
> correctly to begin with.

Exactly and as I mention in another post, I seldom need to address cut edges
other than to bring them to the same smoothness as the other project when
sanding.


>
Snip

>
> There's a "definite maybe" if I've ever seen one! Spoken with true
> conviction.


LOL, "definate maybe", the earliest that I recall using that comment was
in the Fall of 1972 when speaking to the store district manager. I was in
my first year of college and the "definate maybe" answer to his question
brought a "College Kid Answer" from him. ;~)


> Hey! What's that sharp steel thing hanging out of my mouth? What
> the?!?!? Heck Leon, are you fishing again? Geez! Can't a guy offer
> some helpful assistance without getting trolled? I didn't suggest
> that he buy anything. With regard to his setup I said: "That will do
> the trick...". Is that what you Texas boys call the "hard sell"?

LOL, Ed I was just seeing if you were paying attention. ;~)

"RayV" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> The runout measuered on the body of the blade is 0.003". I think this
> is too much but it could be the 'silver' coating on the Avanti blade I
> just bought.
>
> Is 0.001" alignment close enough?
> Is 0.003" blade runout too much?
> Is it OK to have the dial indicator angled so the measurement can be
> taken closer to the table or does it need to be 90deg?
> (as seen here, but not my site)
> http://home.comcast.net/~kvaughn65/dial_indicator.jpg
>

Regardless of the slight differences you see now, how does the cut look?
Happy with the results? Stop fiddling.
A typical Forrest blade when new is with in .001". The arbor run out on my
saw when new was .0005".
When I check my fence alignment I make a test cut. If there were tooth
marks on the keeper side I would slightly adjust the fence on the back side
away from the blade. Tooth marks on the waste side, move the back side of
the fence slightly towards the blade.
Yeah, you waste "a" scrap piece of wood doing this and if your saw is decent
you only have to do this once every 3 or 4 years, maybe.

Regardless of what kind of measuring equipment you use to set the saw up,
you have no control over the fact that most wood does not remain dead flat
or straight to the extent that those tiny measurements that you tweak you
saw to come in to effect. They help but often wood can warp as you cut it.
Wood often will move during the cut much more than the tolerances that you
are looking at and then every thing becomes a moot point.

Or wait a little while and Ed will try to sell you an aligner that may or
may not help with the results of your cut.

"Swingman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

> The "Reality Distortion Machine", once started, must obfuscate, and insult
> with innuendo, ad infinitum.

Ahhhh, smear politics.

--
NuWave Dave in Houston