Delta 35-7657 vs. Dewalt DW7657 - Same Blade?

On Wednesday, January 28, 2015 at 9:17:27 PM UTC-5, DerbyDad03 wrote:
> According to this post from 2007, the 2 blades listed in the subject line=
are (were?) the same blade and also are (were?) decent blades.
>=20
> Does anyone know if this is still true?
>=20
> Stolen without permission from:
>=20
> http://www.sawmillcreek.org/showthread.php?61724-As-The-Saw-Blade-Turns-%=
28chart-update%29&highlight=3Dblade%20turns
>=20
> "The DeWalt DW7657 is a relatively low cost dark horse in this group. At =
< $50, this British made precision GP blade offers similar geometry and per=
formance as the WWII. Cutting performance was on par with the other top con=
tenders. It too suffered slower feedrates than it's TK counterparts on my s=
aw, but remains an excellent budget conscious choice for larger saws. Note =
that this blade was part of the DW series 60 line, but is now also availabl=
e as the Delta 35-7657...often seen in the $40 range (or less!) A terrific =
bang for the buck in the full kerf GP class. "
>=20
> The thing is that Amazon currently has the DW7657 for $55 minus 20% but t=
hey carry the Delta 35-7657 for $18.50. Can they really be the same blade? =
Can a $18.50 blade be any good?
>=20
> DW7657:
>=20
> http://www.amazon.com/DEWALT-DW7657-General-Purpose-10-Inch/dp/B00008K2TZ=
/ref=3Dsr_1_3?s=3Dhi&ie=3DUTF8&qid=3D1422497661&sr=3D1-3&keywords=3Ddewalt+=
10+INCH+40+TOOTH
>=20
> Delta 35-7657:
>=20
> http://www.amazon.com/DEWALT-DW7657-General-Purpose-10-Inch/dp/B00008K2TZ=
/ref=3Dsr_1_3?s=3Dhi&ie=3DUTF8&qid=3D1422497661&sr=3D1-3&keywords=3Ddewalt+=
10+INCH+40+TOOTH

Sorry, I seem to have posted the same link for both blades. Here are the co=
rrect links:

Delta 35-7657:

http://www.amazon.com/35-7657-10-Inch-General-Purpose-Circular/dp/B000O7UES=
C/ref=3Dsr_1_1?s=3Dhi&ie=3DUTF8&qid=3D1422537878&sr=3D1-1&keywords=3Ddelta+=
35-7657+10+INCH+40+TOOTH&pebp=3D1422537880017&peasin=3DB000O7UESC

DW7657:=20

http://www.amazon.com/DEWALT-DW7657-General-Purpose-10-Inch/dp/B00008K2TZ/r=
ef=3Dsr_1_3?s=3Dhi&ie=3DUTF8&qid=3D1422497661&sr=3D1-3&keywords=3Ddewalt+10=
+INCH+40+TOOTH#productDetails

On 1/29/2015 10:04 AM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
> On Thursday, January 29, 2015 at 10:31:33 AM UTC-5, Leon wrote:
>> On 1/29/2015 7:43 AM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
>>> On Wednesday, January 28, 2015 at 10:16:50 PM UTC-5, Sonny wrote:
>>>> The Delta is the better blade and the better buy, in IMO. The Dewalt is a thin kerf. The Delta is a full kerf. Both are carbide with 20 degree hook angle.
>>>>
>>>> More info here, read the review by Knotscott... I would agree with this review: http://www.amazon.com/35-7657-10-Inch-General-Purpose-Circular/product-reviews/B000O7UESC/ref=dp_db_cm_cr_see_all_top?ie=UTF8&showViewpoints=1&sortBy=bySubmissionDateDescending
>>>>
>>>> Sonny
>>>
>>> Something doesn't make sense. Everything I've read, whether it's from back in 2007 or as new as 2015 from Knotscott basically say the same thing:
>>>
>>> "If you're not familiar with it, the Delta 35-7657 was originally the DeWalt DW7657 40T ATB general purpose blade....the same blade that Wood Mag rated favorably against the Forrest WWII a few years back..."
>>>
>>> How can they be the same blade if one is a thin-kerf and one is a full-kerf? Different weight, different dimensions = same blade? What am I missing?
>>>
>>
>>
>> Something to think about, and I will say this with the understanding
>> that not every one has as much disposable income as some and that you
>> may or may not use a particular tool enough to justify its cost.
>>
>> While many of these "inexpensive/cheap" blades may get good reviews, you
>> also would do well to determine how much worth those reviews offer.
>>
>> For instance, if a reviewer indicates that he has purchased many blades
>> and this blade is the best so far, he may not have enough experience to
>> give an evaluation on a blade that may not be useful long term.
>> Or I have had this blade for 3 months is it is the bomb.
>>
>> On the other hand experienced users tend to eventually settle on one
>> blade or two and not change. Primarily they don't change because the
>> particular blade that they use lasts for years on end and trips to have
>> the blade resharpened are fewer, they simply stay sharp much much longer.
>>
>> If you compare a $20~$30 blade to a $110 blade there is a big difference
>> in price. Almost with out fail the more expensive blade is going to be
>> the better deal. Many of these inexpensive blades don't run true and
>> think kerf blades are more susceptible to this and they have a softer
>> carbide and they have smaller carbide teeth. They are not good
>> candidates for being resharpened. The more expensive blades on the
>> other hand are typically individually flattened at the factory, use a
>> much better grade of carbide and can often be resharpened 10 or more times.
>>
>> If you are looking at an inexpensive blade to dispose of after a
>> particular task, buy that one. If you think you might need a blade to
>> perform well and repeatedly for years to come buy a better quality blade.
>>
>> At a certain point every woodworker reaches his threshold of how many
>> times he wants to keep replacing the same tool or blade. I bought my
>> last Forrest blade over 10 years ago, although a particular job provided
>> me with a new Forrest blade 4 years ago. I compared to most on this
>> newsgroup build a lot of furniture, I have 4 customers lined up right
>> now. The last time I had a Forrest blade resharpened was some time in
>> 2010 and that blade is finally due to be resharpened, and that blade had
>> cut the pieces to literally hundreds of drawers, and in the neighborhood
>> of 28 pieces of furniture.
>
> I thank you for this advice, adding that everything you've said has always been floating around in my brain. I especially thank you for the understanding you showed in your opening remarks:
>
> "...I will say this with the understanding that not every one has as much disposable income as some and that you may or may not use a particular tool enough to justify its cost."
>
> In my case, the "disposable income" clause trumps the "use a particular tool enough" clause. If I were to purchase the best of everything I need to complete my kitchen project, I probably wouldn't have enough cash left over for the wood! ;-)
>
> 2 kids in college, the upcoming need for at least one replacement vehicle, maybe two, the expense of long distance trips to help aging parents, etc. all factor into what I can spend on tools. While I'm fully aware that I will probably spend more in the long run, assuming I continue with more woodworking projects, I'm trying to hang around in the middle ground.
>
> I'm trying to do things like e.g. avoid the low-end SD208 dado set, but pass on the high-end SD508, settling for the DeWalt 7670 set. At this point, that's the best way for me to handle my cash flow.
>
> Thanks again.
>

Thank goodness my son is out of college and all of those, raising a
family, expenses are behind me. I hope you are happy and do well with
all of your decisions!

On Thursday, January 29, 2015 at 10:31:33 AM UTC-5, Leon wrote:
> On 1/29/2015 7:43 AM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
> > On Wednesday, January 28, 2015 at 10:16:50 PM UTC-5, Sonny wrote:
> >> The Delta is the better blade and the better buy, in IMO. The Dewalt =
is a thin kerf. The Delta is a full kerf. Both are carbide with 20 degree=
hook angle.
> >>
> >> More info here, read the review by Knotscott... I would agree with thi=
s review: http://www.amazon.com/35-7657-10-Inch-General-Purpose-Circular/p=
roduct-reviews/B000O7UESC/ref=3Ddp_db_cm_cr_see_all_top?ie=3DUTF8&showViewp=
oints=3D1&sortBy=3DbySubmissionDateDescending
> >>
> >> Sonny
> >
> > Something doesn't make sense. Everything I've read, whether it's from b=
ack in 2007 or as new as 2015 from Knotscott basically say the same thing:
> >
> > "If you're not familiar with it, the Delta 35-7657 was originally the D=
eWalt DW7657 40T ATB general purpose blade....the same blade that Wood Mag =
rated favorably against the Forrest WWII a few years back..."
> >
> > How can they be the same blade if one is a thin-kerf and one is a full-=
kerf? Different weight, different dimensions =3D same blade? What am I miss=
ing?
> >
>=20
>=20
> Something to think about, and I will say this with the understanding=20
> that not every one has as much disposable income as some and that you=20
> may or may not use a particular tool enough to justify its cost.
>=20
> While many of these "inexpensive/cheap" blades may get good reviews, you=
=20
> also would do well to determine how much worth those reviews offer.
>=20
> For instance, if a reviewer indicates that he has purchased many blades=
=20
> and this blade is the best so far, he may not have enough experience to=
=20
> give an evaluation on a blade that may not be useful long term.
> Or I have had this blade for 3 months is it is the bomb.
>=20
> On the other hand experienced users tend to eventually settle on one=20
> blade or two and not change. Primarily they don't change because the=20
> particular blade that they use lasts for years on end and trips to have=
=20
> the blade resharpened are fewer, they simply stay sharp much much longer.
>=20
> If you compare a $20~$30 blade to a $110 blade there is a big difference=
=20
> in price. Almost with out fail the more expensive blade is going to be=
=20
> the better deal. Many of these inexpensive blades don't run true and=20
> think kerf blades are more susceptible to this and they have a softer=20
> carbide and they have smaller carbide teeth. They are not good=20
> candidates for being resharpened. The more expensive blades on the=20
> other hand are typically individually flattened at the factory, use a=20
> much better grade of carbide and can often be resharpened 10 or more time=
s.
>=20
> If you are looking at an inexpensive blade to dispose of after a=20
> particular task, buy that one. If you think you might need a blade to=20
> perform well and repeatedly for years to come buy a better quality blade.
>=20
> At a certain point every woodworker reaches his threshold of how many=20
> times he wants to keep replacing the same tool or blade. I bought my=20
> last Forrest blade over 10 years ago, although a particular job provided=
=20
> me with a new Forrest blade 4 years ago. I compared to most on this=20
> newsgroup build a lot of furniture, I have 4 customers lined up right=20
> now. The last time I had a Forrest blade resharpened was some time in=20
> 2010 and that blade is finally due to be resharpened, and that blade had=
=20
> cut the pieces to literally hundreds of drawers, and in the neighborhood=
=20
> of 28 pieces of furniture.

I thank you for this advice, adding that everything you've said has always =
been floating around in my brain. I especially thank you for the understand=
ing you showed in your opening remarks:

"...I will say this with the understanding that not every one has as much d=
isposable income as some and that you may or may not use a particular tool =
enough to justify its cost."

In my case, the "disposable income" clause trumps the "use a particular too=
l enough" clause. If I were to purchase the best of everything I need to co=
mplete my kitchen project, I probably wouldn't have enough cash left over f=
or the wood! ;-)=20

2 kids in college, the upcoming need for at least one replacement vehicle, =
maybe two, the expense of long distance trips to help aging parents, etc. a=
ll factor into what I can spend on tools. While I'm fully aware that I will=
probably spend more in the long run, assuming I continue with more woodwor=
king projects, I'm trying to hang around in the middle ground.=20

I'm trying to do things like e.g. avoid the low-end SD208 dado set, but pas=
s on the high-end SD508, settling for the DeWalt 7670 set. At this point, t=
hat's the best way for me to handle my cash flow.

Thanks again.

The Delta is the better blade and the better buy, in IMO. The Dewalt is a =
thin kerf. The Delta is a full kerf. Both are carbide with 20 degree hook=
angle.

More info here, read the review by Knotscott... I would agree with this rev=
iew: http://www.amazon.com/35-7657-10-Inch-General-Purpose-Circular/produc=
t-reviews/B000O7UESC/ref=3Ddp_db_cm_cr_see_all_top?ie=3DUTF8&showViewpoints=
=3D1&sortBy=3DbySubmissionDateDescending

Sonny

On Thursday, January 29, 2015 at 7:43:51 AM UTC-6, DerbyDad03 wrote:

> .... the Delta 35-7657 was originally the DeWalt DW7657 ....

Was *originally the same blade! Apparently, they are not the same blade, anymore, though the model numbers have remained the same.

> How can they be the same blade if one is a thin-kerf and one is a full-kerf?

Ibid. Shop for the blade, itself, being offered, not the model number.

Sonny

On Wednesday, January 28, 2015 at 9:16:50 PM UTC-6, Sonny wrote:
> The Delta is the better blade and the better buy, in IMO. The Dewalt is =
a thin kerf. The Delta is a full kerf. Both are carbide with 20 degree ho=
ok angle.
>=20
> More info here, read the review by Knotscott... I would agree with this r=
eview: http://www.amazon.com/35-7657-10-Inch-General-Purpose-Circular/prod=
uct-reviews/B000O7UESC/ref=3Ddp_db_cm_cr_see_all_top?ie=3DUTF8&showViewpoin=
ts=3D1&sortBy=3DbySubmissionDateDescending
>=20
> Sonny

The delta is 4 lbs, the Dewalt is 2.2 lbs. Both have C4 micrograin (carbid=
e) teeth. =20

You want a blade for rough cutting (framing stock & "trash"/salvaged lumber=
), as opposed to using a $120 WWII, which I use for my fine/finish cutting?=
The delta is the blade you want. It does pretty darn good for finish =
cutting, also, in a pinch.

One of my Unisaws has the WWII (for fine/finish cutting) and the other (I c=
all it my utility saw) has the Delta (rough/"abusive" cutting). I do lots =
of work with salvaged lumber & other "rough" lumber.... sometimes nails, wi=
re, other "trash", dirt.... so I use the Delta as a utility blade, on the u=
tility saw, but it's a darn good blade, itself, for good fine woodwork use,=
in normal/cleaner circumstances.

Sonny

On 1/29/2015 7:43 AM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
> On Wednesday, January 28, 2015 at 10:16:50 PM UTC-5, Sonny wrote:
>> The Delta is the better blade and the better buy, in IMO. The Dewalt is a thin kerf. The Delta is a full kerf. Both are carbide with 20 degree hook angle.
>>
>> More info here, read the review by Knotscott... I would agree with this review: http://www.amazon.com/35-7657-10-Inch-General-Purpose-Circular/product-reviews/B000O7UESC/ref=dp_db_cm_cr_see_all_top?ie=UTF8&showViewpoints=1&sortBy=bySubmissionDateDescending
>>
>> Sonny
>
> Something doesn't make sense. Everything I've read, whether it's from back in 2007 or as new as 2015 from Knotscott basically say the same thing:
>
> "If you're not familiar with it, the Delta 35-7657 was originally the DeWalt DW7657 40T ATB general purpose blade....the same blade that Wood Mag rated favorably against the Forrest WWII a few years back..."
>
> How can they be the same blade if one is a thin-kerf and one is a full-kerf? Different weight, different dimensions = same blade? What am I missing?
>


Something to think about, and I will say this with the understanding
that not every one has as much disposable income as some and that you
may or may not use a particular tool enough to justify its cost.

While many of these "inexpensive/cheap" blades may get good reviews, you
also would do well to determine how much worth those reviews offer.

For instance, if a reviewer indicates that he has purchased many blades
and this blade is the best so far, he may not have enough experience to
give an evaluation on a blade that may not be useful long term.
Or I have had this blade for 3 months is it is the bomb.

On the other hand experienced users tend to eventually settle on one
blade or two and not change. Primarily they don't change because the
particular blade that they use lasts for years on end and trips to have
the blade resharpened are fewer, they simply stay sharp much much longer.

If you compare a $20~$30 blade to a $110 blade there is a big difference
in price. Almost with out fail the more expensive blade is going to be
the better deal. Many of these inexpensive blades don't run true and
think kerf blades are more susceptible to this and they have a softer
carbide and they have smaller carbide teeth. They are not good
candidates for being resharpened. The more expensive blades on the
other hand are typically individually flattened at the factory, use a
much better grade of carbide and can often be resharpened 10 or more times.

If you are looking at an inexpensive blade to dispose of after a
particular task, buy that one. If you think you might need a blade to
perform well and repeatedly for years to come buy a better quality blade.

At a certain point every woodworker reaches his threshold of how many
times he wants to keep replacing the same tool or blade. I bought my
last Forrest blade over 10 years ago, although a particular job provided
me with a new Forrest blade 4 years ago. I compared to most on this
newsgroup build a lot of furniture, I have 4 customers lined up right
now. The last time I had a Forrest blade resharpened was some time in
2010 and that blade is finally due to be resharpened, and that blade had
cut the pieces to literally hundreds of drawers, and in the neighborhood
of 28 pieces of furniture.

On 1/28/2015 9:17 PM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
> According to this post from 2007, the 2 blades listed in the subject line are (were?) the same blade and also are (were?) decent blades.
>
> Does anyone know if this is still true?
>
> Stolen without permission from:
>
> http://www.sawmillcreek.org/showthread.php?61724-As-The-Saw-Blade-Turns-%28chart-update%29&highlight=blade%20turns
>
> "The DeWalt DW7657 is a relatively low cost dark horse in this group. At < $50, this British made precision GP blade offers similar geometry and performance as the WWII. Cutting performance was on par with the other top contenders. It too suffered slower feedrates than it's TK counterparts on my saw, but remains an excellent budget conscious choice for larger saws. Note that this blade was part of the DW series 60 line, but is now also available as the Delta 35-7657...often seen in the $40 range (or less!) A terrific bang for the buck in the full kerf GP class."
>
> The thing is that Amazon currently has the DW7657 for $55 minus 20% but they carry the Delta 35-7657 for $18.50. Can they really be the same blade? Can a $18.50 blade be any good?
>
> DW7657:
>
> http://www.amazon.com/DEWALT-DW7657-General-Purpose-10-Inch/dp/B00008K2TZ/ref=sr_1_3?s=hi&ie=UTF8&qid=1422497661&sr=1-3&keywords=dewalt+10+INCH+40+TOOTH
>
> Delta 35-7657:
>
> http://www.amazon.com/DEWALT-DW7657-General-Purpose-10-Inch/dp/B00008K2TZ/ref=sr_1_3?s=hi&ie=UTF8&qid=1422497661&sr=1-3&keywords=dewalt+10+INCH+40+TOOTH
>

Hard to tell, but they do look alike.
Are they the same specs, is the plate the same?
within the same tolerances?

Again hard to say, but for 18 and change you can use it for 2x4's if it
doesn't work well.

--
Jeff

On Wednesday, January 28, 2015 at 10:16:50 PM UTC-5, Sonny wrote:
> The Delta is the better blade and the better buy, in IMO. The Dewalt is =
a thin kerf. The Delta is a full kerf. Both are carbide with 20 degree ho=
ok angle.
>=20
> More info here, read the review by Knotscott... I would agree with this r=
eview: http://www.amazon.com/35-7657-10-Inch-General-Purpose-Circular/prod=
uct-reviews/B000O7UESC/ref=3Ddp_db_cm_cr_see_all_top?ie=3DUTF8&showViewpoin=
ts=3D1&sortBy=3DbySubmissionDateDescending
>=20
> Sonny

Something doesn't make sense. Everything I've read, whether it's from back =
in 2007 or as new as 2015 from Knotscott basically say the same thing:=20

"If you're not familiar with it, the Delta 35-7657 was originally the DeWal=
t DW7657 40T ATB general purpose blade....the same blade that Wood Mag rate=
d favorably against the Forrest WWII a few years back..."

How can they be the same blade if one is a thin-kerf and one is a full-kerf=
? Different weight, different dimensions =3D same blade? What am I missing?=
=20

On Sat, 31 Jan 2015 07:37:45 -0700, Brewster <[email protected]> wrote:

>On 1/29/15, 8:31 AM, Leon wrote:
>
>>
>> Something to think about, and I will say this with the understanding
>> that not every one has as much disposable income as some and that you
>> may or may not use a particular tool enough to justify its cost.
>>
>> While many of these "inexpensive/cheap" blades may get good reviews, you
>> also would do well to determine how much worth those reviews offer.
>>
>> For instance, if a reviewer indicates that he has purchased many blades
>> and this blade is the best so far, he may not have enough experience to
>> give an evaluation on a blade that may not be useful long term.
>> Or I have had this blade for 3 months is it is the bomb.
>>
>> On the other hand experienced users tend to eventually settle on one
>> blade or two and not change. Primarily they don't change because the
>> particular blade that they use lasts for years on end and trips to have
>> the blade resharpened are fewer, they simply stay sharp much much longer.
>>
>> If you compare a $20~$30 blade to a $110 blade there is a big difference
>> in price. Almost with out fail the more expensive blade is going to be
>> the better deal. Many of these inexpensive blades don't run true and
>> think kerf blades are more susceptible to this and they have a softer
>> carbide and they have smaller carbide teeth. They are not good
>> candidates for being resharpened. The more expensive blades on the
>> other hand are typically individually flattened at the factory, use a
>> much better grade of carbide and can often be resharpened 10 or more times.
>>
>> If you are looking at an inexpensive blade to dispose of after a
>> particular task, buy that one. If you think you might need a blade to
>> perform well and repeatedly for years to come buy a better quality blade.
>>
>> At a certain point every woodworker reaches his threshold of how many
>> times he wants to keep replacing the same tool or blade. I bought my
>> last Forrest blade over 10 years ago, although a particular job provided
>> me with a new Forrest blade 4 years ago. I compared to most on this
>> newsgroup build a lot of furniture, I have 4 customers lined up right
>> now. The last time I had a Forrest blade resharpened was some time in
>> 2010 and that blade is finally due to be resharpened, and that blade had
>> cut the pieces to literally hundreds of drawers, and in the neighborhood
>> of 28 pieces of furniture.
>>
>>
>
>Amen!
>
>I don't know anybody who has fully tested a variety of tools in a single
>category with enough vigor to determine a 'best-of'. For these kind of
>reviews I look to the magazine tests as the basis for my search, usually
>these are good basic comparisons of features. For individual reviewers,
>the 4/5 stars are kind of meaningless since one persons 'excellent cut
>quality!' may be another persons 'so-so cut quality'.
>For me, the best info comes from the 1/2 star reviews. What is bad about
>that product? For saw blades, mentions of wobble and other defects say
>more than arbitrary claims of quality. Basically eliminate the bad and
>go from there.

I think this is true for just about anything. I never read the 4/5
star reviews because it's rare to actually get any information from
them. However, I want to know what's wrong with a product or service
so read the 1/2 star reviews. In many cases something gets a 1/2 star
review because it arrived broken but the merchant still made good on
it. I'll discount those reviews accordingly. I don't read the 4/5
star reviews but I will look at the ratio of 4/5 to 1/2.

On 1/29/15, 8:31 AM, Leon wrote:

>
> Something to think about, and I will say this with the understanding
> that not every one has as much disposable income as some and that you
> may or may not use a particular tool enough to justify its cost.
>
> While many of these "inexpensive/cheap" blades may get good reviews, you
> also would do well to determine how much worth those reviews offer.
>
> For instance, if a reviewer indicates that he has purchased many blades
> and this blade is the best so far, he may not have enough experience to
> give an evaluation on a blade that may not be useful long term.
> Or I have had this blade for 3 months is it is the bomb.
>
> On the other hand experienced users tend to eventually settle on one
> blade or two and not change. Primarily they don't change because the
> particular blade that they use lasts for years on end and trips to have
> the blade resharpened are fewer, they simply stay sharp much much longer.
>
> If you compare a $20~$30 blade to a $110 blade there is a big difference
> in price. Almost with out fail the more expensive blade is going to be
> the better deal. Many of these inexpensive blades don't run true and
> think kerf blades are more susceptible to this and they have a softer
> carbide and they have smaller carbide teeth. They are not good
> candidates for being resharpened. The more expensive blades on the
> other hand are typically individually flattened at the factory, use a
> much better grade of carbide and can often be resharpened 10 or more times.
>
> If you are looking at an inexpensive blade to dispose of after a
> particular task, buy that one. If you think you might need a blade to
> perform well and repeatedly for years to come buy a better quality blade.
>
> At a certain point every woodworker reaches his threshold of how many
> times he wants to keep replacing the same tool or blade. I bought my
> last Forrest blade over 10 years ago, although a particular job provided
> me with a new Forrest blade 4 years ago. I compared to most on this
> newsgroup build a lot of furniture, I have 4 customers lined up right
> now. The last time I had a Forrest blade resharpened was some time in
> 2010 and that blade is finally due to be resharpened, and that blade had
> cut the pieces to literally hundreds of drawers, and in the neighborhood
> of 28 pieces of furniture.
>
>

Amen!

I don't know anybody who has fully tested a variety of tools in a single
category with enough vigor to determine a 'best-of'. For these kind of
reviews I look to the magazine tests as the basis for my search, usually
these are good basic comparisons of features. For individual reviewers,
the 4/5 stars are kind of meaningless since one persons 'excellent cut
quality!' may be another persons 'so-so cut quality'.
For me, the best info comes from the 1/2 star reviews. What is bad about
that product? For saw blades, mentions of wobble and other defects say
more than arbitrary claims of quality. Basically eliminate the bad and
go from there.

-BR

--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: [email protected] ---