Carter, Iturra, Lenox, Starrett Comparison
Carter, Iturra, Lenox, Starrett Comparison
There have been a number of questions and comments on the Feb. 2007 article Woodworker’s Journal concerning the comparison between the four readily available tension gauges: the Carter, Lenox, Iturra and the Starrett and the saw’s built-in gauge.
That article is based on a number of tests that I did for my new book THE NEW COMPLETE GUIDE TO BAND SAW, which is designed to update the BAND SAW HANDBOOK, published in 1989, which is the best selling band saw book in the world but is black and white and has become outdated.
No field of woodworking has more confusion that the topic of blade tension. I acquired all of aftermarket tension gauges and tested them. The results were all over the board. I was confused. To help me sore it out I hired Aaron Gesicki who has an undergrad and Masters degree in metallurgical engineer with 30 years of experience with GM and Cat making engine parts. For the article I did the photography and the drawings and developed a series of questions. Aaron wrote the article. This is the first article that I know of that compares the gauges to each other. Our test may not be perfect but it is a start and we are open to suggestions for more testing.
One of the SMC members criticized the article because it did not give the mechanical gauge numbers compared to the electronic Carter. When Aaron tested the Carter electronic ( which is modern technology) it measured the equivalent of 15,000 psi (292 pound of wheel load) for a 1/2” blade (see the article). This was the reading when the built-in saw gauge registered on the 1/2 mark. At that setting the Starrett was in the 13,000 psi range, Lenox 10,000 psi and the Iturra was all over the board from 8,000 to 12,000 psi but usually on the low side.
Along with research by an electrical engineer we working on a technical paper covering the relationship between blade tension, sharpness, wheel alignment, pitch etc. If you have suggestions for testing methodologies let me know. Please ask questions here rather than emailing me or sending me a private message.
Mark Duginske
I told myself not to do this
I said that I would not post again on this subject. So much for that.:rolleyes:
First off, Mark, I plan on buying your new book. ( I have the BS book by Mr. Bird and was underwhelmed by it. )
I too, as you may have guessed, own the Ittura gauge. I was surprised and dismayed that it performed so poorly. I accept your comparison, and will at some point get the Starrett gauge.
So now the new question: I have been puzzled for sometime about the claim by Suffolk Machinery that their blades require lower tension to operate satisfactorily. It seems to me that the science of steel making is well understood. If Suffolk Machinery had a new and better blade, the rest of the world would also have it, via industry publications, or metallurgical analysis.
I spent one afternoon using google to explore for silicon steel blade material, and didn't find anything. Maybe it is so common, that it is not worth mentioning? Yes, I could have missed something important...
Soooo, why does the Timber-Wolf blade require/use lower tension as opposed to other brands?:confused:
Any metallurgists out there?:)