Update on saw stop

[Lee Schierer]

I didn't want this to get buried in the previous post, but I think that rumors are bad and their seemed to be more than the usual amount of trffic on a post. So I went right to the horse in this case and asked (Note: I asked them via e-mail this moring and received this response the sme afternoon.). The following is their lengthy response to my e-mail.

"Dear Mr. Schierer,

Thanks for your email and interest in our technology. Yes, there are a lot
of rumors floating around on the various woodworking forums regarding our
technology. When we begin shipping our saws later this year and around the
beginning of next year, hopefully a lot of those rumors will be put to rest.

Let me try to respond to your comments and answer your questions in the
order presented. First, I agree that in the past people have tended to
disconnect safety devices because they interfere with what they were doing,
but I believe SawStop will be different. Our technology does not interfere
with how the saw is used, so there will be no motivation to disconnect the
device. Also, our saws will have a self-test system that detects whether key
components are installed and functioning properly. If not, then the saw will
not run.

If you have an accident and our system is triggered, the user will have to
replace a brake cartridge ($59) and probably the saw blade. The process is
simple and takes about as much time as changing the blade. Hopefully, most
users will not have an accident and will not need to replace the brake
cartridge, but if they do, we do not think the cost of the cartridge and a
new blade will be a significant impediment when compared to the increased
safety of the saw.

Yes, we and around 350 other individuals jointly filed a petition with the
U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission to look at adopting new performance
based safety standards for table saws. You can see a copy of the petition at
http://www.cpsc.gov/library/foia/foi...ladesawpt1.pdf.

We filed the petition because we think it will help make saws safer. Every
year in the U.S. there are over 30,000 serious injuries involving table
saws. About 10% of these are amputations, and about 1.5% are to teenagers
and young adults. These injuries come at a tremendous cost to society in
medical expenses, disability, worker's comp, and rehabilitation, not to
mention pain and suffering. These injuries can now be minimized, and we
believe they should be.

We recognize there is only a very small chance the petition will be granted,
mainly because our saws are not yet out in the field. Nevertheless, we
believe the petition is worthwhile because it will allow the CPSC to analyze
both the technology and the cost to society of table saw injuries. Society
will then have more information to decide whether to adopt new safety
standards after our technology has been in the field for a period of time.

We also hope that filing the petition will motivate other manufacturers to
adopt something like our technology sooner than they otherwise would. We
have spent the last two years talking with all of the major saw
manufacturers about our technology, but no manufacturer has adopted the
technology. They all agree the technology is great, but they would have to
redesign their saws and retool their manufacturing to adopt it, and none of
them want to incur that cost if they can avoid it. The result is that people
are being injured unnecessarily.

We recognize that requiring table saws to be manufactured with something
like SawStop will limit how manufacturers can make saws, and will limit what
saws people can buy, but when we weigh that against the benefit of
minimizing tens of thousands of severe injuries every year - many to
students and employees who do not choose what saw they work on - we come
down on the side of minimizing the injuries. It is the same rationale that
is behind the regulations that currently require blade guards on saws, and
seat belts in cars - the benefits outweigh the costs.

Thanks again for your email. Let us know if you have any other questions.

David Fanning

SawStop, LLC
22409 SW Newland Road 503-638-6201
Wilsonville, OR 97070 503-638-8601 fax
fanning@sawstop.com www.sawstop.com

"

[Ken Salisbury]

WOW - Sounds real familiar
Like somthing I heard from a new car salesman about a year ago

[Ron Meadows]

Doesn't sound like they are in it for the money at all does it? I'm not buying it (no pun intended). I don't see where the rumors that the response refer to are occurring. People are stating, one way or the other, their beliefs in the system. Setting aside my belief on the subject, there needs to be extensive testing to determine if the system actually works and works reliably. A few tests on a hot dog or two hardly make for unbiased test results. Take a look at the second link in the original post for the SawStop petition. Much of their technical data with regards to measured voltage induced on the spinning blade shows a widely varying result dependant on the material being cut (i.e. wood, wet wood, flesh, etc). How does the system measure accurately, especially in wet wood or with sudden entry of an object into the spinning blade, tell what is flesh and what isn't? Looks to me like it can't in some cases. If there is one condition where the device gets confused you are out a finger since you are now relying on this device, and not your brain, to save you. Not good.

I believe that the implementation of this device would yield more trips to the emergency room and not a decrease as the inventors would hope. Users of a saw equipped with it couldn't help but be a little less afraid of the saw which could lead to more risky behavior while using it.

That's my $0.05

Ron

[Steve Jenkins]

If these guys live to make saws safer and that is their reason for trying to make it govt. mandated let them donate the technology and not make a profit from it. Steve

[Howard Norman]

It will be interesting to see if they actually get a saw to market. I, for one, will never buy any product manufactured by this group. I do not like their tactics and will not support those tactics in the market place.

Howard

[Phil Phelps]

What a marketing genius. Invent a procuct with the guise to protect the consumer against any fault. Buy a politician to pass a law mandating the use of such a devise on all saws sold. What's wrong with that? You already bought into air bags and saftey seats for our chillin'. It's the American way........love it or leave it!!!!

[George Summers]

I know it's been said before, but I'll say it again. I just don't like "do-gooders" telling me what is good for me "in their opinion" and then trying to force me to act as they want me to act.

George

[Dan Stuewe]

Just curious. Has there ever been such a hot topic in woodworking discussion groups that has only discussed one opinion?

I haven't read all the posts, but those that I have all dislike (bordering on hate) this product. Harbor Freight has more fans.

Just an observation.

[Jim Fuller]

I am not buying their concern for safety: I think they have sensationalized the issue by showing damaged hands and fingers. Sure we have this happen and it's tramatic for anyone who has an accident.
I have had several scares with a table saw, all from kickbacks, and am extremely cautious. But showing lots of blood and gore so you can get your product on the market is unethical, to say the least.
I agree with Steve, if they really want this to be about safety, donate it and not profit.
One thing that really stands out in all this, is the only source quoted is from sawstop. If there really are 30,000 serious injuries on table saws, (1)where did they get their info,
(2) who decided what was serious,
(3) and how many of these were cuts?
Any back injuries from moving the saws?

Also of the young adults, how many were in schools, where training and supervision should have been in place?
Lots of unanswered questions I think we need more sources to answer these than the folks we are questioning.

my $.02

[Noah Alkinburgh]

...but those that I have all dislike (bordering on hate) this product. Harbor Freight has more fans.

Just an observation.

Dan,

I think there are some that don't like the product...but most think its an ok idea or concept...what we don't like is being forced to use it.

My .02

Noah


PS I liked the Harbor Freight thing...funny

[Paul Geer]

Sound to much like a politician!

Thanks Lee; for posting the letter, I think it shows enough what their true motives are, monetarily speaking.

Anyway we'll see how far they'll get, not too far, I hope!

[Dennis Peacock]

OK....my turn....

1. If their product is so good....then which one of THEM is going to stick their hand in a running saw to test the device?

2. Each person carries different amounts of electrical current, meaning not the same for every person.....what if I don't have enough current in my body to trip the device?

3. I am in 100% agreement with Steve....if it's for safety and not for profit, then donate the technology.

4. It's all a marketing scheme any way and if teeny-bopers are getting hurt while in the school shop?.....then it is just like it was when I was in shop....the instructor was on break or in the instructors office and nowhere to be found inside the actual shop.

5. What about spinning router bits, spinning skillsaw blades, drill bits, poking your hand with a screwdriver?

Let's face it....some people will be more carefull than others, i.e. some woodworks I know do NOT have all their digits any longer. With a suposedly grand safety device....many will be too relaxed when working with the tools and injury's will abound.

<B>The best safety device ever?</B>

<font size="+1" color="blue"><B>Education, Education, Training and care enough about yourself to "think" before the cut.</B></font>

'nuff said......

[Dave Avery]

My $.04, slightly different take......

Regarding motives, 1. money, 2. safety, 3. desire to solve problems - they're engineers, remember. How much of each, only the inventors know - we can only suspect.

The engineers really BLEW IT with their marketing tactics. [I'll start a fight by saying that MOST (not all) engineers are great engineers, and poor marketeers becuase the skill sets for these disciplies are so different]. Mistake #1 - approach the current manufacturers of table saws (commodities) who compete mostly on price and where product innovation is low in terms of purchase decision criteria. Predicatably, they got nowhere. None of the manufactueres wants to tackle a major redesign on the hope of increased sales. Margins are thin enough as it is. Mistake #2 - try to force your way into the marketplace. Woodworkers share only one trait - they don't want to be told that to do. We are a fairly independent lot. Mistake #3 - wait too long before offering your own equipment with the proposed safety device.

All that said, I empathize with their plight. He's a group of guys who think they have a good idea that happens to improve safety (and make money), and they can't get any of the manufacturers interested in buying it. Let's remember that the saw industry is an oligarchy at best (Delta, Jet/Powermatic, Grizz/Taiwan factories must have 80% of the market). As such, it's hard to penetrate a market with new ideas.

The sad fact is that their poor marketing skills will cost them in the end. They've aliented enough people such that the baby will end up getting thrown out with the bath water. And while the current cost of the device is $500, this is at extremely small volumes. Mass produced, I bet the device would add a relatively samll amount to the cost of a saw. For my money - given that I have a 12 year old who shows some interest in woddworking in the future - I'd pay a $200 for a little piece of mind. Would it be a replacement for proper instruction, experience, and other safety precautions, of course not, but it would be worth my money.

With respect to the patent(s) and licensing the technology for free, well.... those suggestions are (you saw it coming, didn't you) patently ridiculous. Of course these guys want to make money. Did they ever say they didn't. Should they be expected to donate hundreds (more likely many thousands) of hours of their time for free. Of course not. Did they choose their marketing strategy poorly, yep.

Hoping this isn't misinterpreted........ Dave.

[David Blangger]

From reading the above it says that the blade will most likely have to be replaced. Does this mean that the blade has become warped and if so to what degree?

Is it possible that a woodworker could possibly become more injured by failing to replace his/her weakened. warped blade?

For some reason I have a picture of a woodworker that has just saved a finger or two having to plop more money down on a safety device on his cabinet saw....ooops I mean contractors saw because with the safety device he couldn't afford the cabinet saw.

Then trying to save his WWII blade to cut expenses and get an ultimate kickback on the first slice of wood.

David

[Dave Anderson]

I know it's been said before, but I'll say it again. I just don't like "do-gooders" telling me what is good for me "in their opinion" and then trying to force me to act as they want me to act.

George

Golly George, it sounds like you might have spent a long vacation in California and some of our tree-huggin' ways were experienced first-hand.


First, spend the money, then pass the law, then MUCH LATER figure out how to actually pay for it... all done because "they" know what "we" need!