Results 1 to 14 of 14

Thread: Shark Guard vs Sawstop PCS guard

  1. #1
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Southern Minnesota
    Posts
    1,442

    Shark Guard vs Sawstop PCS guard

    Some weeks back on a different forum there was a thread that discussed sawstop’s new over head dust collecting blade guard. My blade guard had recently arrived and I had not even used it. While the discussion raged on Steve Gass (inventor of sawstop) posted some information in the thread about how effective the sawstop guard was at collecting dust. In the same thread Lee Styron, the inventor of the shark guard, offered to send a 3rd party his guard to test against the sawstop guard. As a sawstop PCS owner, I was the luck guy that got to test the 2 guards.

    As we have been hearing for some time sawstop claimed that their guard collected 99% of all dust. I did not attempt to confirm or rebut their claim due to my lack of proper measuring equipment to determine exactly how much dust is being collected. My testing was pretty unscientific just pictures, video, and experience to determine what guard collected the most dust. I have had the shark guard and new sawstop guard in my possession for about a month now. In the time I have used each guard a fair amount while working on some Christmas presents. However I had not done a formal test using the same material and cuts until a few days ago. While using each guard before the testing I was very impressed by the lack of dust that did accumulated on the table, in front of the saw, and behind the blade. Some dust does escape each guard, but it is a small fraction compared to the amount that escaped the cabinet dust collection while using a ZCI.

    For each test I ripped a piece of 3/8 particle board that was 11”x24” 4 times and visually inspected the amount of dust that had accumulated. I performed 4 tests, 2 with each guard. One set of 4 rips using a guard with a 16 gallon craftsman shop vac attached to it, and the cabinet of the saw connected to my 1 hp delta dust collector. Then I tested the same guard again while making 4 rips with the shop vac attached but without the delta dust collector on. So in this test only the shop vac attached to the guard was collecting the dust. I also did a control test making 4 rips again with the same material. But in this test I did not use a guard I only used the cabinet dust collector. As expected the control test without using a guard let the most dust accumulate on and in front of the table.

    The 2 tests I performed using the guards with the cabinet dust collection and the shop vac showed no visual difference in the amount of dust that accumulated. So for this portion of the test I could not declare a winner. I suppose you could have swept off the very small amount of dust that was one the table and measured it. But the amount of dust that was left behind was so minor it wouldn’t have even filled a teaspoon. I could not see any dust on myself or any that was on the floor in front of the cabinet.

    Both tests I performed using only the shop vac attached to each guard without the cabinet dust collection showed different results. I chose to do this test because it isolated just the guard. So I could not attempt to determine which guard performed the best by itself. After the set of 4 rips I again visually inspected the amount of dust that had accumulated. The table and in front of the blade again showed a very little amount of dust. And again I could not see any dust that made it to the floor in front of the cabinet. But after these 4 cuts there was a significant amount of dust that had accumulated behind the saw blade and guard. As you will be able to see from the pictures there was a little more dust behind the blade after using the shark guard. Both guards left dust in the same place on the saw but the shark seemed to collect a little less dust. Or in other words there was slightly more dust on the table after using the shark guard for this test, then when the sawstop guard was used. So if you are only going to use the over head guard to collect your dust the sawstop would perform slightly better.

    Here is a link to photo bucket which I have uploaded the pictures and video of each test. The files are under albums describing what test was being performed.
    http://s985.photobucket.com/home/skidooman93/allalbums

    Each of these guards were designed to be used in conjunction with a dust collector connected your table saw and connected to the guard itself. So if you are planning on using the guard as designed I cannot say one would work better than the other. If you plan to only use the over head guard as your only dust collector I would have to say the sawstop would be your choice. But the saw stop guard is only available to be used on the sawstop. The shark guard on the other hand is made to fit most floor standing table saws on the market today. Both guards have some advantages over the other as far as functionality. The sawstop has a limiter that won’t allow the work piece to go under the guard if it is too close to the table. It also is a slightly slimmer design allowing thinner cuts to be made while using the guard. It also flips up totally and stays up by itself if you would like to measure something associated with the blade. The shark guard on the other hand is built much stronger. The lexan that it is produced with is very substantial. And attaching the dust collection hose to the top of it makes more sense and requires less routing when connected it permanently. A simple drop from your ceiling and a 4 to 2 in adapter is all that would be needed with the shark guard. For a permanent attachment the sawstop requires more adapters and routing of the hose around outside of the table. I like the 2 in port on the shark compared to the small 1 in port on the sawstop that require another adapter to us a 2 in hose off of your shop vac. Or even more adapters to use your 4” dust collector. I really think sawstop missed on this. They should have made the back of their guard with a 2 in port and you would need adapters if you want use any other size hoses. Because of the strength of the material and less moving parts I believe the shark guard will hold up much longer. When mounted on a table saw that is used many hours a week I believe the shark the only way to go again due to its strength. At $135 shipped I think the shark guard to be a real good solution to your overhead dust collection for the saws that don’t come with a collection guard. If you are a saw stop professional cabinet saw owner, I think this is another great safety innovation that adds value to this machine. But if I were a industrial or contractor sawstop owner I would have to spend my money on the shark guard. I think it’s strength, ease of hose attachment, and its virtual equal dust collecting abilities make it a better value.




    UPDATE:
    After watching some of my videos I realized the blade is quite high (above the work piece). Normally when using a guard I keep the blade higher because I feel I get a slightly cleaner cut at the end of the work piece.
    Since then I have made a couple of new tests using both guards. This time due to my lack of material to cut into scrap I used birch MDF plywood. Since the material is twice as thick as the pervious tests I decided to only make 2 rips. I again used a piece that was 24” long. But I adjusted the blade so it was only 3/16 above the work piece as it was cut. This did change the results.
    After making these rips with the blade adjusted the Shark guard appeared to have collected more dust than the sawstop guard. A look at the pictures there was slightly more dust left on the table and under the fence when the sawstop guard was used, than when the shark guard was used. The difference in the amount of dust is very small again, but there was a difference. It is possible that 2 different tests can produce 2 slightly different results though. The difference in the amount of dust in both testes was very small. I would have to say after this 2nd test both guards are equal in the amount of dust they collect when and when NOT used in conjunction with cabinet dust collection.

    If you look at the designs of the shark and the sawstop you can see 2 differences. The sawstop guard has 2 pieces inside the guard that fall down to the top of the work piece sealing the inside of the guard off from the outside. The shark does not have this feature. I believe in my previous test since the shark guard/blade was approximately 1” above the work piece. The gaps in the rear of the guard above the work piece were larger allowing more dust to escape. The sawstop guard doesn’t require such adjustment due to its design. I am surprised that the sawstop guard allowed as much dust out when only using the shop vac for dust removal. Its design completely seals off the top of the work piece from the outside. My only guess is that the large amount of dust created by cutting mdf plywood was too much for the small port at the back of the guard to handle all by itself. And in the case of the shark guard the larger port allowed it to collect just a fraction more dust. Once the shark guard is adjust properly only a very small opening is visible at the rear of the guard.

    This does not change my opinions of the guards at all. I think including the sawstop guard with the professional Cabinet saw adds more value to the saw. When compared to other premium table saws that don’t come with over head dust collection. But if I were to purchase a guard for my sawstop Industrial Cabinet Saw or contractor saw I would chose the shark guard. And I think it is an effective safety device and overhead dust collector for any other table saw.
    http://s985.photobucket.com/home/skidooman93/allalbums
    Last edited by Paul Ryan; 12-10-2009 at 9:51 PM.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Posts
    615
    Thanks for the writeup, Paul.

    Mike

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Chicago suburbs
    Posts
    24
    I know it has been awhile since you did this but thanks for the info.

  4. #4
    Thanks for this. I am an owner of a PCS and former owner of a Sharkguard. I find both to be great at collecting during 'fully housed' cuts.
    Where the SG excelled for me was in trimming rip cuts. In this case, the SS guard's left cheek is open and spews dust. My SG had a 4" mouth which was wyed into my 1.5hp DC. I found the extra airflow to be more efficient at keeping the dust at bay.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Ames, IA
    Posts
    382
    Hey Paul,

    Thanks. I'm heading to purchase a SawStop this Fri. I was inspecting them last night, saw the dust collector over the blade (extra cost), and was hoping it would do a good job. I don't have any dust collection on my Delta contractor saw (being replaced by the SS). so I'm looking forward to the dust collection.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Southern Minnesota
    Posts
    1,442
    Bob,

    It has been a year since I wrote that review and have had more time to use both guards. The sawstop guard does an excellent job with a shop vac that is what I used at the time of the test. I didn't have a good way to collect my dust collector to the guard at the time. I still recommend a cheap collector for the cabinet as well as the above table guard. The 2 combined will do a very good job at keeping your shop clean.

    The 2 collectors spewed about the same amount of dust when I performed trimming cuts. Neither did a great job at collecting the dust for those cuts. In my defense the shark I have only has the 2 1/2 port and was connected to a shop vac. One with a 4" port connected to a good dust collector would probably do a better job.

    It really is amazing the amount of suction that is inside the SS guard when connected to the shop vac. It acutally sucks the guard down to the table and requires a little more effort to life the guard when the vac is turned on. But I think a dust collector that moves a large amount of air instead of the velocity of the shop vac would be the best way to go and would capture the max. amount of dust that could be collected. I use a 2hp dust collector now that pulls from the cabinet and the guard.

    But in all honestly I still dont like using guards even though they keep the top of the table clean. They bother me I hoped I would use a guard more when they were actually collecting wood dust, but I still hate the partial loss in visibility. And I move my saw around quite frequently and hooking up the extra hoses for the overhead guard just to take it down when doing none through cuts ticks me off. So unless I am doing a lot of ripping continual ripping I dont usually use the guard. Most cross cuts are done on my miter saw. So my table saw does some ripping but is mostly used for jointery and very often none through cuts. So the guard does collect a lot of the none collectible dust if you know what I mean. But if you use guards I really recommend the shark guard of the SS if you are buying a SS machine.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Chicago suburbs
    Posts
    24
    Paul, My current set up is a Shark guard (I think original one) for my Bt3000. I hate to see her go. I am happy to see Lee made something out of making those. I think the major benifit of the SS guard is the thinner rip capacity with the guard still on. I am oppisite of you and only take the guard off for cross cuts.

    Thanks again
    Rob

  8. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by Paul Ryan View Post
    But I think a dust collector that moves a large amount of air instead of the velocity of the shop vac would be the best way to go and would capture the max. amount of dust that could be collected.
    There's not a lot of dust to collect above the blade, but it is being flung at high velocity, so I believe SS's low volume/high velocity method is the better way.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Northern CA
    Posts
    97

    SawStop PCS Blade Guard on my Grizzly G0691

    I recently installed the SS PCS Blade Guard on my G0691. The SS blade guard easily screwed onto the G0691 splitter and uses the stock G0691 pawls. I messed around with my own version of blade guard dust collection before deciding to buy the SS. I used an improvised 4" to 1 1/2" reducer to connect to the dust collection hose. I bought the SS instead of the Shark because the SS was narrower and had the pivoting sides. It works well.
    Attached Images Attached Images

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Phoenix, AZ
    Posts
    1,417
    I have a SS ICS, and haven't researched this yet-- does this Saw Stop guard not work for the ICS? Or is it just for the PCS?

    One other thing, I'm actually surprised that folks design/engineer these for 1.5 or 2.5" connections, instead of 4" and 6" connections. I would think that having a 6" ball in the end of a hose, then a "dado" slot cut in the ball that allowed it to fit around both sides of the guard, glue it to the guard, and then remove the internal cheek pieces... would be vastly superior for DC on a top guard.
    Thread on "How do I pickup/move XXX Saw?" http://www.sawmillcreek.org/showthread.php?p=597898

    Compilation of "Which Band Saw to buy?" threads http://www.sawmillcreek.org/showthre...028#post692028

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Ames, IA
    Posts
    382
    Paul,

    Thanks for the comments. FYI, I'll be hooking up the dust port to my Delta dust collector. I haven't set it up in a permanent location, yet, so I need to finalize some equipment locations and start some piping. Frankly, I've never used a spitter, riving knife, blade cover, or any safety equipment on my table saws. I simply grew up prior to all that stuff. However, a small injury last March in which my left thumb grazed the table saw blade got my attention like FAST. So, that's the reason for bypassing other table saw options and buying the SS.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    886
    Quote Originally Posted by Prashun Patel View Post
    Where the SG excelled for me was in trimming rip cuts. In this case, the SS guard's left cheek is open and spews dust.
    That's exactly my experience as well- the edge-trimming cuts spew dust everywhere on my SS. I think version 2.0 of their guard should have a "split nose" at the front of the guard so that it can use the same aerodynamic principles as the current version does, but has independent movement on either side of the blade.

    I don't think I'm articulating this well, but hopefully you guys know what I mean.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Southern Minnesota
    Posts
    1,442
    Quote Originally Posted by Dave MacArthur View Post
    I have a SS ICS, and haven't researched this yet-- does this Saw Stop guard not work for the ICS? Or is it just for the PCS?

    One other thing, I'm actually surprised that folks design/engineer these for 1.5 or 2.5" connections, instead of 4" and 6" connections. I would think that having a 6" ball in the end of a hose, then a "dado" slot cut in the ball that allowed it to fit around both sides of the guard, glue it to the guard, and then remove the internal cheek pieces... would be vastly superior for DC on a top guard.
    Dave,

    I would give SS a call they are very helpful. They have always answed all of my questions and have top notch customer service. I thought that the blade guard would mount right in on the ICS saw. But have read that sawstop did make some changes on the guard or new ICS saws to allow the use of the guard. If you call them with your serial# they will be able to answer your question.

  14. #14
    The slam dunk with the SS guard on the SS is the interchangeability with their riving knife. I had a Shark Guard on my SawStop. The Shark Guard was very very nice. The SS system comes with the guard and the interchangeable riving knife. It's very convenient and I feel that the SS guard is just as durable as the Shark Guard, and it collects just as well.

    Neither one does a particular good job on cuts where the workpiece doesn't span the whole guard.

    Generally, I feel the Shark Guard is just superior to any guard on any saw save for the SS where the Shark Guard is merely as good though possibly slightly less convenient. Lee's got an exceptional product on his hands, and the price is right. Ultimately, I gave away my Shark Guard, not because it wasn't any good but because I really wanted some one else to enjoy it, and went with the SS once it was available because the SS guard is thinner and matches the typical work I do better. I do instrument work mostly and I need a thin guard...even the SS guard is too thick sometimes. For the vast majority of users, Lee's guard is probably the way to go.

    So the bottom line is that Lee has a fantastic product but SS has a great product as well. Not everything has to be a horse race, and not everything needs to have a "best". On a SawStop, you will not go wrong with either guard. On just about every other tables aw on the market, it would be difficult to beat a SharkGuard until you get into things like the Excalibur for significantly more $$$. Lee's got a great product.

    As always, this is just my opinion.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •