Wadkin PK slider table saw or Martin T17 slider ?

[David Kumm]

I feel the fever starting to build. Dave

[Keith Bohn]

It's like vintage cars. Ask six different people and get six different answers and of those six, half might answer "neither". Really boils down to which the buyer likes the most and whether he would rather own an antique or a more modern, more functional machine.
Just my 2-cents.

Erik Loza
Minimax USA

I think you might have a mis-understanding of the build quality of Wadkins and Martins.

[peter gagliardi]

Dave, not on my end, I have zero interest in flaming this out.

[jack forsberg]

He's Baaack! Good to hear from you Jack No machine is perfect, the question becomes , do its strengths outweigh its weaknesses.
Peter

Really i do think the Wadkin PK is perfect if viewed from a point of view that machines become a part of the craftsman who stands in front of, and does the work its was designed for. in the case of the wadkin PK solid wood dimensioning .

the PK is sized right for solid lumber. lets face it you are not going to come across wood wider than 24" very often and the cross cut is plenty for even glue ups. You don't need more than 24" rip or 36" cross cut. The fence is for solid wood with a lock down on a sliding dovetail way at the very apex of the cutting teeth. This give them a very ridged fence index to the cut because the fence is not reaching from a front bar so so by design there is not deflection at the cutting point. The micro adjustment has a 1&1/4" travel so that if you need to move the fence its very easy to slide across to within 1" you very first try. Now what makes it special is the fence does not need to be unlock to use the fine adjustment nor pins pulled to locate so if your making a tenon you range though this and all fence setting can be done with the fine adjustment handle(with 2 fingers) because of it 1"+ travel.


the Wadkin PP and the Martin T17 for that matter are what i call 1/2 panel saw. They both far short of solid wood dimensioning in terms of ergonomic, the T17 more so as the sliding table is an after thought IMO and the scoring blade set the main further back from the front. The increase of the table size makes them larger and harder to work over the blades for wood joinery( the largest complaint of tradesmen doing work on modern sliders) and for sheet stock there just too small. Anyone with a full panel saw will not want one for panel work. there is a reason large sliding table saws have aluminium tables. I do not think i would like to be push a huge big ass cast slider like the bolt on Oliver 88DX. these 1/2 panel saws were short lived because they were transition saws to the full slider,that's what make them rare. the PK was made from the mid 20s to the mid 60s even though the PP had been introduced the PK was still being ordered. Could be why the 1/2 panel saws are more rare. they just did not have the production years. What i do think is Wadkin drooped the ball on panel saw development which made way for the Italian and German to take the market. That being said you will not find a nicer saw for solid wood than the Wadkin PK and i would like to add that the Brits had no quorum at making them look good at doing it too. this is just not what saws are made for today.



Not sure many have seen how smooth the slider is on a PK so here is some Porn.



jack
English machines

[jack forsberg]

I feel the fever starting to build. Dave

that would be Wadkinitis

jack
English machines

[David Kumm]

that would be Wadkinitis

jack
English machines

As much as I love my big Euro sliders I agree with the smaller stuff. I seem to always go to my Hammond Trim saw but the Wadkin in the video looks to be fairly small footprint and way more versatile. The oliver 88 is too big, the 270 too rare, so small footprint sliders are hard to find although there are a few euro ones around. They are rare on the used market too. Any changes in the PK between the 20 and 60s that are worth mentioning. Hope I'm not going too far off course here. Dave

[Kyle VanMeter]

I think Jack really hit the nail on the head. There (probably) is not a better, more efficient saw out there for solid lumber, nor another saw that can cut with the accuracy and repeatability than the Wadkin PK. This saw was marketed specifically to pattern shops and engineering firms that would settle only for the best. (That being said I really like the Oliver 270 slider, and my Oliver 260 dual arbor slider for cutting solid wood accurately)

It is true that the P17 has a larger capacity for crosscutting and ripping, but that can be a disadvantage when using it to cut smaller solid pieces of wood. Conversely, I would not go to a Wadkin PK to size medium or large panels for case goods. A P17 or a full sized Euro style slider would be a more appropriate choice. Each of these types of saws has situations where they excel, and the Wadkin will take the cake when it comes to solid lumber dimensioning.

Here is an example of work I have done on a dimension saw, that I absolutely could not have accomplished on a Euro sliding table saw, or a modern conventional machine (Unisaw, PM2000, etc). These dimension saws don't drive themselves, but they are very easy to use and offer consistent results, which really allows you to focus on the work you are trying to accomplish.
IMG_1496.jpgIMG_1601.jpg

[jack forsberg]

Just to be clear, I'd like to have both! But I was trying to get feedback from users of both machines.

the only 2 people i know that have used both are Dev Emch and Arthur in NJ.

emchd@qwest.net


http://www.owwm.net/wordpress/?author=1

jack
English machines

[jack forsberg]

Any changes in the PK between the 20 and 60s that are worth mentioning. Hope I'm not going too far off course here. Dave

Lots of threads on the PK history and wadkin and many other English machines Makers at Canadian woodworking vintage tool forum.
http://forum.canadianwoodworking.com...ge-Power-Tools

jack
English machines

[Joe Calhoon]

T-75 with slider forward.jpg
Great discussion. Most likely I will never see a 17 or PK in my shop unless opportunity presents itself but it is sure fun to compare the two. Jack, that is hands down a work of art on that saw. It is beautiful!
One thing to consider is at that time these saws were made and still today woodworking in the UK is a lot different than Germany and the rest of Central Europe. Furniture, doors, windows, stairs and built in cabinetry are not approached the same way. The machinery designs from both countries reflect this - just look at the difference in shapers, tenoners and mortisers between the 2 countries.
Jack is right that the dimension saw was a stepping stone to the full on sliding panel saw. Martin promoted the T75 as a joinery saw by sliding the cast iron slider forward and removing the outrigger. I never had a issue with the cast iron slider or the accuracy of the front mount rip fence on that saw. We used ours for years like this after getting the newer saw. I regret selling the saw after getting a straight line rip but we were out of room.
Myself, if I had only one saw to use for solid wood crosscutting, ripping and sizing in a small shop I would still pick the 17 just because of the capacity and convenience of how everything functions. Fold down rip fence, fold down sliding table, rip fence that slides front to back and can be turned with a thin section to the blade. We pretty regularly size large glueups and crosscut large timbers and don't see how this could be done easily on the PK without going to that fixed extension table like the PP has. No doubt the PK would be better for smaller pieces with the sliding table close. If Martin had offered the T75 with a 4’ slider they would have had it all for a small joinery saw. I see the Wadkin saws only have one blade speed. One thing I liked about the Martin was with the different speeds we could run a quiet 12 or 14” blade for most work only using the noisy 18 or 20” for massive timber.
Peter said “ There is more going on behind that simple looking monotrol dial on the Martin than in the whole Wadkin saw,”
This says it all, only someone who has crawled inside a T17 or 75 would know what he is talking about.
I have spoken with Dev before about Hofmann shapers. If he has a PK I will stop in and take a look sometime.
As a side note we have been using the Fritz and Franz jig on our large slider for a few months now and it turns this machine into a very convenient and safe saw for doing solid wood cross cutting and ripping even on small pieces. I would say it is safer than the Sawstop just because your hands are never close to the blade. We keep a 1960 Unisaw on wheels for odd stuff and have not turned it on since using the jig.

Joe

[jack forsberg]

T-75 with slider forward.jpg
Great discussion.
Peter said “ There is more going on behind that simple looking monotrol dial on the Martin than in the whole Wadkin saw,”
This says it all, only someone who has crawled inside a T17 or 75 would know what he is talking about.
I have spoken with Dev before about Hofmann shapers. If he has a PK I will stop in and take a look sometime.

Joe

Dev never may not have found one but he was looking hard for a PK a few years back.

http://www.ukworkshop.co.uk/forums/w...irl-t8210.html

So Joe whats going on under the hood? . Little monkey moving parts around. Do ya not think we would understand how the German made a rise and fall tilting arbor that was controlled by one handle? the Oliver 260 got things under the hood too. While the Germans may work wood differently they did not invent wood.well maybe partial board
The Germans worked with the Brits and the Americans in fact it was the Germans that gave Oliver the clam head cutter block for there jointers. There is no question that the Germans made good Kit,the question is how did they made it good? lets compare.

jack
English machines

[peter gagliardi]

Jack,
On the Martin there are concentric dials approximately 10" diameter out front with a series of chains, sprockets,and gears behind with a spring assist for elevation.
The inner dial raises and lowers the arbor assembly with a graduated edge scale that is labeled in mm with each graduation representing 1 mm and being approx. 1 1/8" apart allowing for extremely fine and minute incremental height adjustments with a center height clamp lock knob.
On the tilting arbor portion- the outer ring, it is graduated in single degrees around the perimeter also with a separation of about 3/4" between markings. The very cool part is that the saw goes from 90 degrees to 45 degrees with ONLY ONE complete revolution again allowing for very finite adjustments to the cutting angle.
After looking at numerous old machines in person and pictures , I'd bet there is not a better or more accurate graduation system out there- certainly well within pattern shop tolerances even though they probably never used one of these in that environment. I think it less about one saw more accurate than the other, and more about the manner in which these manufacturers accomplish the task.
A good operator can probably get equal work out of the units at hand.
Mostly, it comes down to aesthetic differences than unit capability.
I certainly am enjoying the exploration though.
Peter

[jack forsberg]

Joe and Peter

you have to remember you are comparing your saw to something that was developed 30 years early. The wadkin PK was one of the first electric driven machines to have a tilting arbor with rise and fall(pre 1926) after the american model. if you look at the Martin history in there early years you will find there saws barbaric.
http://www.martin.info/cms/_main/com...2-1949-en.html


its fair to say that the Brits had been at it a lot longer than the Germans at this point and it would have been there kits in there pattern shops that could have built the pattern for there first models I mean let face it Germany had the shit kick out of it after WW11. the Brits still had there industry intact to a greater extent and being broke from the war had to keep the old patterns going until the 50s. Martin was making farm tractors at this point.


the technology that was available to the Germans in the 50s due to the war machine had made it possible for some very interesting advancements in the industry. so mush money was pored into the war effort that the industry were starving for a market after peace.Put in front of the Germans that the Brits had most of the patients on wood working machines and you have the mother of invention. the 50s onward s is German and Italian .


Because the PK was made in so far off a time frame as the T17 you have to take into account the way things were made in the 20s. Its just so happens that i believe that this to be the purest time of machine making in term of a direct connection to the the craft.


let me explain


the first machines were to replace hand work . this meant that machines in the early years were made by craftsman that work with there hands entirely. there was a direct connection to the machine and the hand work that it was replacing. the next generation of machines were improvements in machines based on older machines and not so much hand work. As the new machines displaced hand work they became improvements on machines only and not the craft. today we have machines solely abstract from the craft IMO and driving its direction as to how to build. the PK for me gives this back.


gauges on the PK were made by hand


the quadrant with locks into presets and hand cut makings.



it can be set to complimentary angles or mirror angles with one setting.



it can be locked near the front of the table for increased cross cut with 90 pin lock.



it can be used as a tenon jig with tapering of stock




not sure if all slider tables do this but the PK slides open for tapers of to 5".




i do not have a pic of the in laded rule in the table for the fence(1/16" markings by a firm from the 1830 well know for there interments but i could get one)if you would like. it is accurate at any angle the blade is tipped the makings.


all the inner-eds in the PK rise and fall tilting are enclosed in oil baths with bronzes gears works and never see saw dust .


just a way different time frame when dust collection was not at every shop and shop set up in the woods.




jack
English machines

[Joe Calhoon]

Jack I agree the technology of Wadkin is earlier even though they were made into the 50s. And I would not want a Martin made before 1960 or so. They had some interesting machines like a tilting table shaper. Not near as developed as Wadkin or some of the US iron. The industrial revolution started in England and along with the US I think had the best woodworking machines up till the late 50s.

The T75 was the most successful and best selling machine Martin made. I actually like the hydro pedal movement of the tilt and rise on my newer saw but the T75 had a magic to it. I think Peter said the newer machines are more convenient to use and that is a good way to put it.

The T75 is the only machine other than your PK that I have seen with lateral movement of the sliding table. There are probably others.

Joe

[Peter Kelly]

Great pics!

I often wonder what Wadkin would have to charge for a modern version of the same machine these days.