SawStop files petition with CPSC.

[Paul Geer]

I saw this on another forum and thought everyone here would be interested. SawStop the makers of a device that instantaneously stops a table saw blade when it contacts human skin has filed a petition (CP 03-2) with the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) to mandate that all table saws with blades 12" or under be outfitted with the technology.

SawStop's web site: http://www.sawstop.com
CPSC Petition page: http://www.cpsc.gov/library/foia/foi...tion/peti.html

What do you think?

[Ron Meadows]

While I agree with the idea of Sawstop, I don't agree that they should be a mandated accessory on every new tablesaw. They should devise a method that is easily retrofitted onto current saw designs and let the end user choose about its use.

I could say a lot more about this subject, but we don't do politics here

Ron

[Jason Roehl]

I'm with Ron on this one...we don't do politics on here, so I can't go into how much like tyranny/extortion/racketeering this is.

The market/manufacturers already said they didn't want SawStop, so that's no reason to go get it mandated. Not to mention that the petitioner stands to profit from any implementation of requirements.

Stinks no matter how you look at it.

[Ken Garlock]

I am 110% against a mandated requirement for this device, especially when it is profit motivated.

I think the product is a good product if you want it, but I don't want it If it were mandated, I would be the first to disable it.

The question now becomes: how do you submit comments on the petition? I would be willing to send the people in DC my vote against the device.

When my shop was inspected for "occupancy," in order to get the electric meter set, I was required to install 20 some GFCI plugs just because I had a double door to the shop. Go figure So as the GFCI plugs fail, I will replace them with standard plugs, I have a box of them in the attic Another less than erudite requirement....

[Jim Becker]

When my shop was inspected for "occupancy," in order to get the electric meter set, I was required to install 20 some GFCI plugs just because I had a double door to the shop.

Interesting, considering that one GFCI at the begining of the circuit protects the whole circuit. The only instance that I can see needing them in every location would be if the wiring itself was ungrounded. In that case, they are appropriate to protect you. Oh...another thought...did you have 20 circuits that needed protected?? That might make sense!

[Ken Garlock]

Interesting, considering that one GFCI at the beginning of the circuit protects the whole circuit. The only instance that I can see needing them in every location would be if the wiring itself was ungrounded. In that case, they are appropriate to protect you. Oh...another thought...did you have 20 circuits that needed protected?? That might make sense!

Hi Jim. Just to refresh my own memory, I just counted 2 30A/240V, 7 20A/240V, and 15 20A/120V outlets. So, yes, I was over stating (lying) about over 20 GFCI outlets, it was only 15 Each of those has its own home-run and circuit breaker. Of the 15, 12 are paired in the 3 quad boxes on the north a 3 on the south walls. Then there are 2 duplex on the east wall and one on the west wall. The notorious double doors are on the west wall. All the 120V outlets are at 42 in. off the floor. The 20/240 outlets are 3 on each the north and south walls, one on the west, and 2 on the east walls. They are are all at 14 in. from the floor. There is 1 30A on the east wall for a dust collector, and one 30A in the dust collector floor ditch. There is also a 30A in the shop garage for an air compressor. Of course, only the 20A/120V circuits have the GFCI option.

I try to accurate on what I post, but my disgust with the topic clouded my thinking. Thanks for making me fess-up.

[Ed Weiser]

After reading the links involved with this petition, I feel compelled to add my 2 cents.
(1) This petition would never have been filed if SawStop were a commercially viable product.
(2) The alleged manufacturer comment that "safety doesn't sell" is absurd. Biesemeyer, Exactor, Excalibur, etc. continue to have vigorous sales of safety-oriented products. Articles appear almost daily describing after-market products that are "safety first".
(3) I suspect that SawStop has been rebuked by power tool manufacturers because of Sawstop's greedy royalty demands. In their own documents they estimate that "at most" SawStop would add 25% to the cost of a table saw. For a Delta Unisaw, that would add over $400. After reading through the technology description, the royalty to SawStop might be $300 or more per saw. (SawStop is not "rocket science", simply a clever idea.)
(4) If SawStop is so concerned about saw user safety, I would somewhat "tongue-in-cheek" suggest that the technology be provided free. After all, they themselves are trying to circumvent the open market by appealing directly to the USCPSC for intervention.
(5) I agree completely with the previous posters. THIS PETITION SMELLS WORSE THAN WEEK-OLD OYSTER SHELLS!!
Just some thoughts IMHO...

Ed Weiser

[Ian Barley]

I have to agree that a commercial organisation attempting to compel the installation of any device (safety or otherwise) on which it has a monopoly is so patently wrong as to be almost laughable.

Over here in europe we are used to a much higher level of regulation on things like this but I cannot think of anything were a piece of safety regulation gives any manufacturer a monopoly of this nature.

If sawstop has such a compelling idea, and the price is appropriate, it will get taken up. The truth is that they are selling safety in a situation where the user has a complete ability to avoid the incident being protected against. I cannot conceive of an instance where I, in using a table saw, would touch the moving blade. I use blade guards and manage my cuts to avoid it. I have complete control of the event.

Contrast this with the airbag in a car, a device which fills a similar safety niche. The big difference is that I take my car on the highway and thereby come into contact with other risks (drivers) where I do not have complete control. The airbag is therefore protecting me against incidents which I cannot have the complete ability to avoid.

Sawstop is clever. If I were choosing between two otherwise similar saws and one had sawstop fitted and it cost an extra $50 -$60 I would probably go for it. The cost of replacement cartridges wouldn't concern me as I would never anticipate having to replace one.

If this petition gets anywhere I will be both amazed and disappointed.

[David Blangger]

However this time I will abide by the rules. I will silently agree with above posts

David

[Pat Salter]

Woodworkers Journal April issue has a few letters to the editor concerning this.

[John Parker]

I have been hesitant to post to this thread becouse I am one of the statistics spoken of. About one year ago I lost the first joint of my right middle finger in my table saw. The accident happened becouse of a error on my part and a slip on some sawdust on the floor in my shop. The saw stop probably would have saved my finger tip. I did have a overarm guard and splitter on my saw. Even knowing that the sawstop might have saved my finger, I still think the way that this company is trying to get thier product used is wrong.

[Eddie Severt]

I have been hesitant to post to this thread becouse I am one of the statistics spoken of. About one year ago I lost the first joint of my right middle finger in my table saw. The accident happened becouse of a error on my part and a slip on some sawdust on the floor in my shop. The saw stop probably would have saved my finger tip. I did have a overarm guard and splitter on my saw. Even knowing that the sawstop might have saved my finger, I still think the way that this company is trying to get thier product used is wrong.

John,
I thank you for the courage to speak your mind on this matter. I admire you for your honest assessment of this matter. I usually stay out of these discussions, but I felt I had to get into this one. Following is a copy of an email I sent to the CPSC this morning. Everyone feel free to copy it and send it as is, or modify it to suit your own feelings. The email address is : info@cpsc.gov and the petition number is: CP 03-2.
Thanks,
Eddie Severt

Sirs,
Regarding the above petition, I am of the opinion that this is an attempt to force mandatory regulation of a specific safety device solely for the profit of the only company that makes such a device. The mandatory added cost of approximately $400.00 per saw would effectively block me from purchasing a new saw that incorporated this safety device, even if I would want it. If you study the individual cases of injury caused by table saws, it becomes apparent that "kickback" of the material being cut is the greatest cause of injury. I would like to see this product as an option on new saws, but I must strongly protest it being made a mandatory modification to all products in this area. Also, as proposed, this would not enhance workplace safety as most production shops use saws larger than the 12" suggested in the petition as the maximum size. I thank you for your careful consideration of this matter.
Sincerely,
Edward Severt
Box 275
Bolt, WV 25817

[Dave Bonde]

I agree 100% with Ron and others. Put out a product if it has value the consumers will support it.
Dave

While I agree with the idea of Sawstop, I don't agree that they should be a mandated accessory on every new tablesaw. They should devise a method that is easily retrofitted onto current saw designs and let the end user choose about its use.

I could say a lot more about this subject, but we don't do politics here

Ron

[Richard Allen]

Hi Paul

Thanks for the heads up and the links.

[Bill Grumbine]

What do I think? I just came in from rototilling the garden in the bright sunshine and 110% humidity. I didn't think I coud get any hotter right now, but I am.

I have written at length on this Saw Stop thing, and I think the people trying to shove it down our throats are reprehensible - and they will probably succeed, considering how our society is trending towards a nanny state. I may have already crossed the line for this forum, and if I have, I apologize to you all.

Bill