SawStop files petition with CPSC.

[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 Falis]

David,

Interestingly, I consider myself sort of "ultra-liberal", but I didn't hear a thing in your post that I disagreed with. ;-)

Maybe you were being too circumspect, or just a gentleman.

- Ed

[David Rose]

Ed, sometimes I think the liberal/conservative definitions are pretty blurred. I probably shouldn't have even used the word.

No, I wasn't being "just a gentleman". I was sharing my heartfelt convictions pretty straight. OK... maybe we should define "gentleman" too.

David

David,

Interestingly, I consider myself sort of "ultra-liberal", but I didn't hear a thing in your post that I disagreed with. ;-)

Maybe you were being too circumspect, or just a gentleman.

- Ed

[Robert Waddell]

I'm just curious! What is it about this anti-hotdog slicer that he tool mfg's don't want. I would think that a product this revolutionary they would be running over each other to get it first. There must be something wrong with it or the inventors are a bunch of jurks asking for too much money.

[Jim Becker]

I'm just curious! What is it about this anti-hotdog slicer that he tool mfg's don't want. I would think that a product this revolutionary they would be running over each other to get it first. There must be something wrong with it or the inventors are a bunch of jurks asking for too much money.

1) Requires complete redesign of the arbor/trunnions
2) Replacement "Cartridges" are expensive...$60-80 a "pop". Literally. One your trip it, you have to replace the mechanism...it cannot be "reset".

[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

[Robert Waddell]

1) Requires complete redesign of the arbor/trunnions
2) Replacement "Cartridges" are expensive...$60-80 a "pop". Literally. One your trip it, you have to replace the mechanism...it cannot be "reset".

Thanks for the info. Jim. I wasn't aware of the replacement cartridges. But even with this information it still points in the direction of they want too much money and are willing to do what ever it takes to get it or the design has not been fully developed. Replacing the cartridges should never happen and if it does IMHO I think a finger is worth more than $80. I think what we have here is a case of greed plain and simple.

[Ed Falis]

David,

You're right about those definitions not quite being up to the realities. But let me define how I meant gentleman in my post: someone who has the courage of his convictions, respect for himself and others, and is secure enough in himself not to have to prove anything to anyone.

- Ed

[David Rose]

Ed, I like the definition. I'm working in that direction.

David

David,

You're right about those definitions not quite being up to the realities. But let me define how I meant gentleman in my post: someone who has the courage of his convictions, respect for himself and others, and is secure enough in himself not to have to prove anything to anyone.

- Ed

[Ken Salisbury]

I don't like the idea of forcing something on the consumer and the tool folks that is going to make the company rich or put a lot of tool manifactures out of business.

My 2c.

Bill Roland

Bill,

I was reading the petition to see what it was all about. Since I was having a slow day I scanned down through the list of petitioner's names I might reconize. There is William A. Roland from Mt Juliet on the list. Could it be ? Based on your comment above I guess there is either another Bill Roland in Mt Juliet or they have harvested your name from somewhere.

[Patrick Smith]

I hope everyone takes this post as worth what you paid for it.

I agree with their petition. I think they are right on track and will support them 100%. So what if trunnions need redesigned? They've been the same for 60 years. So what if cartridges cost $60? The surgery on your finger cost 5 grand. I even hope they come out with one of these for my router, because freehand routing scares the S**T out of me and I sure don't want to be like the stories I read here.

The fact is, if tool companies were honestly concerned about safety they would have picked up on this right away. Or better yet they would have designed one of these on their own! But they haven't - their concern is profits, which is understandable. But sometimes when new technology, or new ways of doing things (or saving fingers) comes along, it TAKES regulation and mandates to force companies to actually care about safety enough where it impacts their bottom line and the consumers wallet, too. Think of the Corvair and how it started the wole industry of automobile safety, and how much safer our cars are now. Same mentality (people were mad about new ways of doing things) and it definitely has made vehicles much more expensive. How I dream about a $4000 Corvette that I will never see. But I don't ever need to think about being impaled on a chrome dashboard in my new Honda.

The other fact is that every company in the world has an agenda. The mfg's (Delta, other tool makers, even Saw Stop themself) interest is profits. The accessory companies (as mentioned those that make guards, etc.) have a big interest in keeping everything the status quo. This device would turn everything on it's ear. I don't see that as being a bad thing, even if someone says I can't buy a new table saw without one.

You are all entitled to your feelings and opinions on this. I respect that totally. My summed- up opinion is, if there is no usability impact to this technology I'll pay the extra money for it gladly, and saw my projects stress-free for the rest of my days.

Best regards to all.
Patrick

[John Miliunas]

Patrick, while I can agree on the safety end of it, I'm really thinking that many of the previous posts are leaning against such a mandate, not for just this one petition. If you read between the lines on many of the posts, it's not just about SawStop, but more so, it's about mandates, in general. It's starting to look like the "Big Brother" syndrome. Where does it stop? You yourself mention the router and your feelings regarding its safe operation. Well, let's take it a step further. No, let's take it *many* steps further: Just about *any* tool that you plug into a 110-240v outlet carries some risk(s) or danger of injuring the user. Look at any one of the user manuals which come with these tools. I'll bet each and every one of them is prefaced with a multitude of warnings and precautionary notes. They're typically scattered about within the context of the remaining manual, as well. These warnings are there for a reason. And, it doesn't end with tools. As mentioned in my previous post, stairs are a leading contributor to personal injury. So what should be done about them? Outlaw them or mandate air bags be designed into them to cushion the fall? (Gee, I hope I didn't give some wiseguy a "bright idea" there!

Again, I'm not saying the proposed device, in itself, is a bad thing. Safety is of paramount importance and we have a very large audience here who, I'm sure, would not argue that. But *mandating* such a product, particularly when the proposal has the designer of said product doing the cheerleading, is just wrong on many levels! Instead, I'd personally like to see the government press the OEM's a bit into doing research and developement for similar safety products. I could even *almost* agree with the government pushing OEM's into developing more safety peripherals, BUT, those peripherals should then be offered to the customer as an *option*. NOT something immediately built into the machine with a corresponding price increase. As it stands now, the petition brought forward has a main purpose of making the manufacturer and/or patent holder very rich. And, at the taxpayers' expense, no less! I mean really, when's the last time you saw an advertisement for their product? If this petition became law, not only would their profits soar, but they would be doing it with NO advertising! Some folks may call this very resourceful. I call it pretty low rent!

I too, respect your feelings and opinions on this matter. My opinion is that we *already* have the Government trying to run our lives in too many ways! I sure don't want them trying to run my shop, too! OK, stepping down off the soapbox now.

[David Rose]

The worst injury I have had from tools in 33 years of gunsmithing and two years of hobby woodworking was from a screw driver. There was nothing permanent as I missed a tendon, but it entered my hand nearly an inch. I am so glad it wasn't a nice sharp chisel! The wound might have been cleaner but much deeper. I knew at the time that I was in an awkward and hazardous position. I took a shortcut and took a chance and paid for it.

My point is that any useful tool can be hazardous if incorrectly used. Some can do more damage than others granted, but I really feel the way to deal with the problem is training. I do not own a table saw, but if I did, I think I would like this type safety device. I probably would not buy theirs on principal, but that is my principal not everyone's. But I would hate for others who do not want it to have to pay for it. If it could be sold as an option, I think it would be great. Generally, I like safety devices. Sometimes I peel them right off.

I probably use a router more than any tool in wood working. I very seldom make a climb cut because I was taught (books and online) that was normally the wrong way to do the job. Some guys can do it well and safely. Most of the time I think about the job I am doing and observe the potential problems. As is often said "the best safety mechanism we have is our brains".

Stay sober, stay alert, don't push yourself beyond reasonable limits or leave and come back to the shop another day.

David