My 10" Ridgid table saw has been pretty reliable (about 5 years old) and
overall I have been happy with the saw. However, recently it started
cutting rather poorly especially on rip cuts. I replaced the blade with
a quality thin kerf one and it was much worse - even burning crosscuts.
After checking this new blade (nothing seemed to be wrong it), I put
another back on it anyway.
I checked with a dial gauge the blade vs the miter slots - only about
0.002's off from one side of the blade to the other against the same
point on the blade. The dial gauge is a home made thing bolted to a bar
run in the miter slot (good quality). So, I think that means the
trunnion positions are OK.
Then I checked for wobble in the blade. It seems to be about 0.01 inch.
I'm not certain that I'm doing that measurement correctly but rotating
the blade by hand with the dial gauge against the blade (slightly
"inside" the carbide) can exceed 0.01 from one side of the blade to 180
degrees. It returns cleanly to 0.000 after 360. Looking carefully, I
can actually see it wobble.
I checked more than one blade, cleaned and checked the arbor, nut and
washer. No effect.
So, I take it all apart. The tilt lock bolt is bent and the bushing
like thing on the side wall supporting the tilt knob is pushed out the
saw side wall at least a 1/4 inch (a design problem there). I don't
know how this happened. My only guess is somehow the lock bolt binds
and it slowly bends when you tilt the blade over and over.
I bend all that back and the blade still has wobble even without the
belt tension and yet the arbor spins freely and seems to have no play.
There is a ground area between the threads and where the blade normally
sits that looks a bit too deep but seems to be original.
Ridgid's phone support was some help suggesting the arbor bearing and
they supplied a local repair shop and parts supply numbers.
So, finally my questions:
- I have seen plates for sale to use rather than a saw blade to check
the runout and alignment. Are these worth the dollars?
- More importantly, what should be the maximum "wobble" you measure with
a good blade, aligned saw, bearings in good condition, etc ?
I found one comment at Rockler that suggested 0.005" on a 10" diameter.
I find the "arbor runout" term confusing. I would think there are at
least three items: || to miter slot, vertical translation square to
table face, wobble in the arbor bearings, blade flatness, maybe others.
Any suggestions would be appreciated. I don't want to use the saw in
this condition and I'm really don't care for the idea of someone else
working on it.
Thanks,
- S
BillB wrote:
> I've had the 2424 for about 6 years and its been a great saw. However,
> the fence is a piece of crud. New it was very good, but after a while
> it developed a bow along the lower edges. The top is true, but the
> lower edges have about a 1/16" inward bow. This leads to binding and
> burning on rip cuts. The wood follows the bow in and then it gets
> wedged back out towards the blade. Check if your's has a bow to it. If
> not, ensure that the fence is parallel too, or slightly kicked out on
> the far end from the blade.
>
> A wobbling blade won't burn, think of a wobbler dado. It can lead to a
> rougher than normal cut. Burning on a crosscut has to be a dull or
> gummed blade, or the miter slots are not parallel to the blade.
>
> A thin kerf blade is easier to flex so it is easier to burn with if
> everything else is not right. When it is being flexed the teeth are not
> in proper alignment to cut.
>
> S wrote:
>
>>
>> My 10" Ridgid table saw has been pretty reliable (about 5 years old)
>> and overall I have been happy with the saw. However, recently it
>> started cutting rather poorly especially on rip cuts. I replaced the
>> blade with a quality thin kerf one and it was much worse - even
>> burning crosscuts. After checking this new blade (nothing seemed to
>> be wrong it), I put another back on it anyway.
>>
>> I checked with a dial gauge the blade vs the miter slots - only about
>> 0.002's off from one side of the blade to the other against the same
>> point on the blade. The dial gauge is a home made thing bolted to a
>> bar run in the miter slot (good quality). So, I think that means the
>> trunnion positions are OK.
>>
>> Then I checked for wobble in the blade. It seems to be about 0.01
>> inch. I'm not certain that I'm doing that measurement correctly but
>> rotating the blade by hand with the dial gauge against the blade
>> (slightly "inside" the carbide) can exceed 0.01 from one side of the
>> blade to 180 degrees. It returns cleanly to 0.000 after 360. Looking
>> carefully, I can actually see it wobble.
>>
>> I checked more than one blade, cleaned and checked the arbor, nut and
>> washer. No effect.
>>
>> So, I take it all apart. The tilt lock bolt is bent and the bushing
>> like thing on the side wall supporting the tilt knob is pushed out the
>> saw side wall at least a 1/4 inch (a design problem there). I don't
>> know how this happened. My only guess is somehow the lock bolt binds
>> and it slowly bends when you tilt the blade over and over.
>>
>> I bend all that back and the blade still has wobble even without the
>> belt tension and yet the arbor spins freely and seems to have no play.
>> There is a ground area between the threads and where the blade
>> normally sits that looks a bit too deep but seems to be original.
>>
>> Ridgid's phone support was some help suggesting the arbor bearing and
>> they supplied a local repair shop and parts supply numbers.
>>
>>
>> So, finally my questions:
>>
>> - I have seen plates for sale to use rather than a saw blade to check
>> the runout and alignment. Are these worth the dollars?
>>
>> - More importantly, what should be the maximum "wobble" you measure
>> with a good blade, aligned saw, bearings in good condition, etc ?
>> I found one comment at Rockler that suggested 0.005" on a 10"
>> diameter. I find the "arbor runout" term confusing. I would think
>> there are at least three items: || to miter slot, vertical
>> translation square to table face, wobble in the arbor bearings, blade
>> flatness, maybe others.
>>
>> Any suggestions would be appreciated. I don't want to use the saw in
>> this condition and I'm really don't care for the idea of someone else
>> working on it.
>>
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> - S
> Check if your's has a bow to it.
The fence is fine - I could get a piece of 0.002 shim brass between the
fence and a very fine level but not a 0.005 shim. With the fence vs
the table top, the 0.005 went under one corner. The problem I had with
this fence long ago was the cheap alignment screws - replaced with
ground down socket head cap screws. I did that so I could actually get
it || on the table.
I see what you mean about the wobble.
I've been doing "surgery" on this thing and it is still half apart.
I added two 3/4 inch "L" steel bars to the side wall and bolted them to
both the side and the so called "stiffener base" for the tilt screw /
tilt handle. The side wall is not flexing much now but I still see a
slight outward motion when the blade approaches vertical (0 degrees). I
triple checked the stop screw - it is not hitting to early. I had not
given much attention to this before but the saw has always required a
bit more force turning the handle as it approaches 0 degrees. It is
much better now but I'm still not happy and will order a new tilt lock
screw.
Is it typical that the tilt mechanism gets harder to move at the
extremes of the motion (near 0 and/or 45 degrees)?
> dial the flange.
I'm getting about 0.0015 --> 0.002 on the flange (at about the 1" radius
point). That seems to correspond to the larger value I got before (5 x
0.0015 = 0.0075 or 5 x 0.002 = 0.01 ). If I spin the blade in various
positions relative to the flange, it has little effect (changes ~0.001
at the outer edge of the blade) - implies to me that most of the wobble
is not the blade.
> or the miter slots are not parallel to the blade
OK, my next step is to work try and improve the alignment - can only help.
My own comment:
>> There is a ground area between the threads and where the blade
>> normally sits that looks a bit too deep but seems to be original.
I also found a whole series of messages on the rigidform site about
stacked dado blades - seemingly on this arbor. It claims that they have
a replacement policy for it. If one chipper is placed on the arbor in
this "unlucky" place, it can result in a groove at the bottom of the
dado. I have previously had this happen but had attributed it to my bad
technique. I checked it today and a 1/16 chipper fits right down into
the low section of the arbor and even a 1/8 chipper can end up off
center. However, this can't be the source of my problem with a single
blade (the wobble).
I'm still not certain on the spec for the arbor flange but between the
0.0015 and the chipper problem, I may simply ask for a new one.
Thanks,
- S
I've had the 2424 for about 6 years and its been a great saw. However,
the fence is a piece of crud. New it was very good, but after a while
it developed a bow along the lower edges. The top is true, but the
lower edges have about a 1/16" inward bow. This leads to binding and
burning on rip cuts. The wood follows the bow in and then it gets
wedged back out towards the blade. Check if your's has a bow to it. If
not, ensure that the fence is parallel too, or slightly kicked out on
the far end from the blade.
A wobbling blade won't burn, think of a wobbler dado. It can lead to a
rougher than normal cut. Burning on a crosscut has to be a dull or
gummed blade, or the miter slots are not parallel to the blade.
A thin kerf blade is easier to flex so it is easier to burn with if
everything else is not right. When it is being flexed the teeth are not
in proper alignment to cut.
S wrote:
>
> My 10" Ridgid table saw has been pretty reliable (about 5 years old) and
> overall I have been happy with the saw. However, recently it started
> cutting rather poorly especially on rip cuts. I replaced the blade with
> a quality thin kerf one and it was much worse - even burning crosscuts.
> After checking this new blade (nothing seemed to be wrong it), I put
> another back on it anyway.
>
> I checked with a dial gauge the blade vs the miter slots - only about
> 0.002's off from one side of the blade to the other against the same
> point on the blade. The dial gauge is a home made thing bolted to a bar
> run in the miter slot (good quality). So, I think that means the
> trunnion positions are OK.
>
> Then I checked for wobble in the blade. It seems to be about 0.01 inch.
> I'm not certain that I'm doing that measurement correctly but rotating
> the blade by hand with the dial gauge against the blade (slightly
> "inside" the carbide) can exceed 0.01 from one side of the blade to 180
> degrees. It returns cleanly to 0.000 after 360. Looking carefully, I
> can actually see it wobble.
>
> I checked more than one blade, cleaned and checked the arbor, nut and
> washer. No effect.
>
> So, I take it all apart. The tilt lock bolt is bent and the bushing
> like thing on the side wall supporting the tilt knob is pushed out the
> saw side wall at least a 1/4 inch (a design problem there). I don't
> know how this happened. My only guess is somehow the lock bolt binds
> and it slowly bends when you tilt the blade over and over.
>
> I bend all that back and the blade still has wobble even without the
> belt tension and yet the arbor spins freely and seems to have no play.
> There is a ground area between the threads and where the blade normally
> sits that looks a bit too deep but seems to be original.
>
> Ridgid's phone support was some help suggesting the arbor bearing and
> they supplied a local repair shop and parts supply numbers.
>
>
> So, finally my questions:
>
> - I have seen plates for sale to use rather than a saw blade to check
> the runout and alignment. Are these worth the dollars?
>
> - More importantly, what should be the maximum "wobble" you measure with
> a good blade, aligned saw, bearings in good condition, etc ?
> I found one comment at Rockler that suggested 0.005" on a 10" diameter.
> I find the "arbor runout" term confusing. I would think there are at
> least three items: || to miter slot, vertical translation square to
> table face, wobble in the arbor bearings, blade flatness, maybe others.
>
> Any suggestions would be appreciated. I don't want to use the saw in
> this condition and I'm really don't care for the idea of someone else
> working on it.
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> - S