All table saws to be SawStops?

[Jim Dwight]

I just say a youtube by a channel I think is called "731 Woodworks". He reports on some meetings by the consumer products safety commission (I might have that name wrong) where they are talking about mandating technology which will stop the blade before it penetrates our body more than 3.5mm. I think he said the meeting was in October of 2023. That doesn't dictate sawstops but we saw with the Bosch saw that if anybody tried to offer technology that is different but achieves the same result SawStop will sue and the expense of protecting yourself was too much for Bosch - which is not a really small company. So the only practical way to meet the requirement would seem to be to license SawStop technology. They may give a relatively long implementation time that might allow some of SawStop's patents to expire but in a response to the commission Steve Gass said he is trying to extend them.

The one bright light I saw in the video was input from a patent lawyer talking about putting together a package "deal" for use of all necessary patents. Apparently that sort of thing is common in telecomunications areas. If the commission put that together to go with implementation it might also just raise the price of table saws but the price of the "deal" plus the cost of implementation.

If you are thinking you want a non-sawstop tablesaw it might be necessary to move forward before too long (in the next few years).

[Richard Coers]

Here we go, another Sawstop post. GET YOUR POPCORN!

[jack duren]

Talking isn’t anything, but a fact is…


Let us know when it becomes a law…

[Nick Crivello]

Granted, the technology is different but it hasn't stopped Felder or Altendorf with their offerings.

[Andrew Hughes]

Self driving cars and sawstop have a lot in common.
People should always have a choice

[Christopher Wellington]

Self driving cars and sawstop have a lot in common.
People should always have a choice

Should the insurance pool have to bear the cost of surgery, physical therapy, etc. when an individual declines the safety feature and then suffers a preventable injury? Should any and every safety feature be mandated regardless of how small the benefit?

Issues like this that seem, on the surface, to be simple matters of personal choice are rarely so simple.

[Andrew Hughes]

Yes if someone pays for insurance then they should get what is agreed.
Life is vexing enough. I don’t entertain hypothetical words.

[Jim Dwight]

I don't remember if it was Feldor or Altendorf but one of them said their technology currently costs $7000 to implement and they don't see any way it can drop to less than $1,000. Neither was believed to be usable for what I would consider a normal U. S. table saw because of difficulty or cost to implement. Which seems to make SawStop technology the only choice.

In case anybody wonders I have a PCS and I like it but I am definitely not a fan of Steve Gass. I also believe SawStop is disengenous when they claim that there has never been a serious injury on one of their saws. I got a broken bone and several stitches from a dado stack despite their technology. The injury was definitely completely my fault, the saw did not cause it, but they know of my injury and I suspect there have been worse. To SawStop broken bones and multiple stitches does not constitute a "serious injury". I think I would definitely have been injured worse and the technology helps but I don't think it helps to suggest all you will need is a band aid if something goes wrong and you are using their saw. I'm also not completely sure that SawStop can say they have always met the proposed standard. My injury would have been close to the proposed limit and may have exceeded it. The scar on my finger is about 1/4 inch long.

[Jim Becker]

I'd be surprised that Gass would even be involved at this point given that Sawstop and presumably the IP, was sold to the parent company of Festool, Tanos and a few other companies a few years ago...

[jack duren]

If the technology helps, it’s better than nothing..There was no technology when I got my fingers in the dado on the saw in 1983. Could it have been worse than loosing the tips to the first knuckle?

[jack duren]

Gass, Gass, Gass…. Let’s get past Gass and talk about the technoloy. That’s what really on the table at this point..

I got kicked off Woodnet 10 years ago getting into a heated argument with members and Steve Gass while he was trying to get this patented..

Still got players in the game complaining..

[Justin Rapp]

https://www.federalregister.gov/docu...-on-table-saws

[mike stenson]

Last time I looked Sawstop effectively loses patent protections in May 2026. Even though they started to expire in 21.

Safety devices are, inherently, a good thing if they do not cause operations to become so complicated that they are disabled or removed.

Maybe y'all want to pay good money for my old unisaw without any safety devices, I suspect if I were to sell it today it'd be worth maybe $500.

[Larry Frank]

Yes, the Consumer Product Safety Commission is considering such a rule and here is what they published last year. While I have a Sawstop and believe in the technology, I do not think this is appropriate. It would price tablesaws out of the reach of many people.

SUMMARY:

The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (Commission or CPSC) has determined preliminarily that there may be an unreasonable risk of blade-contact injuries associated with table saws. To address this hazard, the Commission proposes a rule under the Consumer Product Safety Act (CPSA) that would establish a performance standard that requires table saws to limit the depth of cut to no more than 3.5 millimeters when a test probe, acting as surrogate for a human finger or other body part, approaches the spinning blade at a rate of 1 meter per second (m/s). The Commission is providing an opportunity for interested parties to present comments on this supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking (SNPR).

[Mark Wedel]

I wonder if an issue at some point will be that any business, school, or non owner/operator might all move to blade stop technology for insurance and lawsuit reasons.

I could imagine a worker in a cabinet shop losing a finger to a non sawstop saw, and aside from perhaps a high medical bill, also sues the owner (and by association, his insurance company) on the basis that the shop is negligent having such a dangerous tool when safer ones are available. That then leads the insurance companies to refuse to insure shops that don't have blade stop technology (or charge considerably more), which then might mean shops move to that technology, which might not be a bad thing.

But the unfortunate result of this might be those shops selling off their old saws to hobbyist, which might only use the saw a few hours/week, might also not be as well trained as that person working in the shop, so it just moves the risk.

At this stage, it is just a proposal - lots of time governments propose various things that do not go anywhere.