BANDSAW: Grizzly 17" G0630x or 24" G0568 ??? Advice needed!

[Bill Space]

Thanks to all for the input. Really helps me with respect to what I may end up doing.

One thing I found very interesting is the question: "What are you going to use this bandsaw for?"

Perhaps I am different than most, but I like to have tools available and tend to figure out the best way to accomplish what I need to do with what I have. In other words, I do not buy tools to accomplish projects, but rather I let my projects define which of the tools that I have will be most useful in accomplishing what I need to do.

And since i do I do not know what I may undertake tomorrow, with respect to buying a new bandsaw, I should buy what has the greatest probability of satisfying such unknown future needs.

Most people come in through the front door. Perhaps I am one who gravitates to the back door... 😀

Again, thanks for the advice! Mike Cutler gave me an idea to search for previous posts specific to one or the other of the saws I mentioned, and this has turned up a ton of useful info.

Great site, great people. Thanks again... Bill

[Chris Hachet]

Have you never heard about the bandsaw rule
If the 24" is as beefy as the one Shiraz showed on that thread ...no contest

" Never come down! "

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H3i30km1s4w

Love the music, humor and link. However, I think one needs to be careful about assuming bigger is better when it comes to band saws. There are real space, power, and cost disadvantages to larger band saws.

That being said, I own a 20 inch Powermatic 87 and am in love with the vintage 30 inch Tannewitz the gentleman had in his shop when we hauled home the Powermatic.

[Chris Hachet]

Thanks to all for the input. Really helps me with respect to what I may end up doing.

One thing I found very interesting is the question: "What are you going to use this bandsaw for?"

Perhaps I am different than most, but I like to have tools available and tend to figure out the best way to accomplish what I need to do with what I have. In other words, I do not buy tools to accomplish projects, but rather I let my projects define which of the tools that I have will be most useful in accomplishing what I need to do.

And since i do I do not know what I may undertake tomorrow, with respect to buying a new bandsaw, I should buy what has the greatest probability of satisfying such unknown future needs.

Most people come in through the front door. Perhaps I am one who gravitates to the back door... 

Again, thanks for the advice! Mike Cutler gave me an idea to search for previous posts specific to one or the other of the saws I mentioned, and this has turned up a ton of useful info.

Great site, great people. Thanks again... Bill

And also thank you for your interest in band saws. I think they are an astonishingly under rated tool. I see lots of them come up for sale with really short hours.

Mine are in use every time I or my shop mate are in the shop.

[Bill Space]

The short answer is the 636 is a better and heavier built saw. They are simply different weight classes of saws.

Like to follow up on Van's comment.

According to the comparison chart in the 2017 Grizzly catalog:

The 17" 636 weighs 620 pounds.

The 24" 568 weighs 836 pounds.

The 568 is therefore 1.35 times heavier.

Scaling up from 17", 17" x 1.35 = 22.92".

So proportionately, if the 17 inch saw was scaled up to a proportionately weighted larger size, it would turn into a 23" saw.

So by weight there is about a 4% difference in weight per inch of throat. Is this significant? I think not. GRANTED it is impossible as the consumer to determine where the steel was placed.

While Van is technically correct (4% relatively lighter is 4% lighter) I am not sure this is a significant difference.

Seems to me me it would be a fairer assessment to conclude that these two saws are in the same weight class when weight and throats size are considered.

Now the 701 at 717 lbs would probably be the winner.

Lets see:

The 19" 701 weighs 717 lbs.

The 24" 568 weighs 836 lbs.

The 568 is therefore 1.166 times heavier

Scaling up from 19", 19" x 1.166 = 22.15"

So the 24" 568 is about 8% lighter than a scaled up 24" 701 would weigh. Is 8% significant? I don't have a clue.

For PRACTICAL purposes wouldn't this put these three saws in "about" the same weight class? More or less?. Granted there may be features that make the 636 & 701 more desirable, such as table tilt +/- and perhaps blade guides.

The 636 & 701 would certainly 4% to 8% heavier than the 568 if each were scaled up to 24". Is this difference enough to put them in different weight classes? I do not know, but my get is saying "probably not."

Bill

[John C Bush]

Not trying to complicate your decision making process -- I have the 21" G0531B and it has been a great saw for my needs. I visited the showroom and couldn't identify a big difference in most of the models. Structural enhancements are well hidden. They didn't have many of the "ultimate models" then and the 531 has 14 1/4" resaw capacity-- I have only needed more a couple of times--so if you aren't sure what capacity you may need and you want to save 1K take a look a the 531. I usually keep a 1" Lenox woodmaster CT on It and use it frequently. Good luck.