Band Saw vs. Table Saw… heart of the shop.

[Mark Singer]

In my mind you need both... Rips and sizing is done on the cabinet saw ....resawing , some sizing and joinery is done at the bandsaw.. Chair parts at the bandsaw... I personally need both and when I am working, they are both being used. I usually start at the joiner and cabinet saw to insure square cuts and accuracy.. using my sled parts are cross cut at the cabinet saw... Finer details and joinery...tenons, bridals, large scale cross cuts...3" or bigger in depth are done cleanly here.

[Rob Millard]

I am glad you have worked out a system for ripping lumber to width that you are happy with. However, I don't think you will get many people to agree that a bandsaw is a very appropriate tool for ripping dimensioned lumber to a precise width. It may be a workable, if clumsy, substitute if that is all you have to work with.

Art,
I for one will agree.
My little cheap Jet 14" bandsaw makes quick and accurate rips. I can't remember the last time I used my tablesaw, but it has been at least 6 weeks. I've used my bandsaw nearly every day in that time. For my kind of work, in solid wood, I give up nothing in the way of productivity, by using the bandsaw almost exclusively.
Rob Millard

[Ken Milhinch]

Let's face it, both machines are excellent for what they are designed to do. Using one to do the work of both can only be a compromise.

[Gary Keedwell]

I have both but use the TS 95º of the time. There are times that only the BS will do the job right.
Gary K.

[Doug Shepard]

I never would have considered going BS only with my previous 14" BS. The MM16 makes this seem much more feasible, and I sure could use the space that the TS occupies. But for cutting sheet stuff, I think I'd miss the TS too much. I do occasionally use clamp on guides (the old original Tru-Grip clamps) and circular saw to break sheets down slightly, but for repeat width cuts, it's hard to beat the speed that the TS gives you. Dados and rabbets are another area where I'd miss the TS. I do often do those with a router, but that's usually when I need a stopped cut. The TS is just faster for me, not having to do multiple router passes to get to depth, and then there's the dust collection. Even with no DC hooked up, at least a large percentage of the dust ends up in the saw cabinet rather than the router throwing chips every which way (I know - another excuse to get a Festool router ). I think I'd rather rip on the TS too, even though either saw needs handplane or jointer cleanup afterwards. I do like the smaller kerf of the BS for crosscutting (size permitting) or doing miters though. It often means you can get grain/figure continuation going around the corners on pieces. The bigger TS kerf usually results in a slight offshift in the grain lines. With a better guided rail setup, I think I could function nicely without a TS but I'm just not ready to take that leap. Space constraints could always change that though.

[Mandell Mann]

I would think the purpose for using the BS for ripping would be to save your wood from being wasted by the larger TS blade kerf. If one is using the BS and jointing in between each cut, wouldn't it be more of a waste than using the BS than the TS? I would probably use the BS for ripping larger pieces of wood (4x4?) down to desired sizes and then square them up on the TS along with the jointer.

[Matt Lentzner]

How about a band saw and a panel saw?

[Justin James]

I did a couple of on-site cabinet builds using a bandsaw (a little bitty Darra James that I tried repeatedly to buy) and a panel saw/router instead of a tablesaw. It might be a viable option for a small (or specialized) shop.

[Von Bickley]

Everybody has a different type of shop and they do different type of work. The TS has always been the heart of my shop and I'm sure it will always be. I can see where some people would not need a TS, but that's not for me.

[Paul Simmel]

Somewhere there’s been a serious twist from the original theme; namely that for slicing and dicing raw or rough lumber, a BS is the main tool in my shop. Now it appears the discussion has spun into panel ripping, etc., etc.

A cabinet maker is going to have a TS or some sort of panel saw at their heart because he will do mostly panel work. A TS will rip and dimension face frame stock very well… because it doesn’t have to be perfect anyway. The TS will rip already dimensioned solid stock for raised/flat panel glue ups, etc.

I stated originally that I did not do panel work (sheet goods), but solid lumber furniture… but only now do I have a kitchen coming up, and for this specifically I have purchased a TS after many years. I also stated that I do not dislike my TS now that I have it, that I can see certain advantages having one in the shop. So I don’t think I said that I wouldn’t ever have a TS, or that the BS is betting than a TS.

The concept is simple. For slicing up stock as a prep for jointing and planning, the BS is my tool. And since my sense of power in the shop stems from the ability to saw whatever I want, in dang near any dimension, the BS is my tool.

Also I stated that I joint my stock after ripping because stresses are released, so I oversize some of my cuts to compensate for this process. Face frames can be twisted back to straight using the sheet goods carcass as a reference with pocket screws, dados, or biscuits. And there is nothing wrong with this.

I dimension my stock on the jointer and planer… the most accurate being the planer… I can dial it in to within a few thousandths.

I gave my 14” BS away to a good friend. The 14” was a learning experience. Though I attempted to use the 14” in the same manner, it was under powered.

For me, the most basic skill in woodworking is to be able to make square and straight stock in whatever dimension required from whatever raw material walks into my life. That’s what my machinery is for. That’s the heart. It’s a sense of power, a sense of independence.

The BS is the most awesome slicer and dicer there is.

The jointer is the most awesome tool for flattening and squaring.

The planer is the most awesome repeatable dimensioning tool ever invented.

Someday I will have a really heavy-duty BS, but my 1.5 hp machine right now eats whatever I give it with cheap, nothing to brag-about blades. My rips and re-saws are extremely straight and very accurate with zero compensation. I set my fence, and the boards come out perfect… just a little rough. You’d have to be a moron to get hurt on a BS or a planer. Jointing… takes some sense and a lot of caution. A TS can throw a piece right through your back wall into the yard (if it doesn’t hit you first).

IMO, if you don’t factor in the jointing and planing aspect to woodworking, non of the above will make sense and it will go “pist” right over your head anyway.

[Ken Milhinch]

Paul,
A bandsaw is slower, rougher and not as accurate as a table saw, but it is definitely safer. If that is what suits you, good luck to you. To each his own.

[Art Mann]

Chuck,
Put another way, when measuring lumber for cutting, I always try to estimate how much will be milled off afterward for a straight, square board. Considering one will never have a straight board after ripping it or resawing it, why would I care how “slick” the cut is?

Well that statement is where we disagree. You may have trouble ripping a board straight and square on a tablesaw but I don't. Of course I joint a reference edge first but then I just rip the other edge parallel with a good saw blade. All the woodworkers I know do it this way and seem to do just fine. When I do panel glue ups, I usually run the second edge through the jointer after ripping but sometimes I don't. I haven't been able to tell any difference in the result either way. If I am ripping rails or stiles to width, I never run them through the jointer after the sizing cut. Too me, that just introduces another possibility for dimensional error. I will run a ROS over the sawn surface, or maybe scrape it after the cut, but I would do that anyway. I will sometimes plane 3/4" lumber to width by standing it on edge if it isn't too wide (~1 1/4"), but that is a matter of convenience rather than necessity. I use digital calipers to measure widths and have no touble ripping to +/- 0.005 if it is really important. What I am saying is you have started out with what I consider an erroneous assumption, and I have lots of evidence to convince me of that. I don't mean to criticise. If you are getting the results you are looking for with a bandsaw, jointer and planer that is good. I just wouldn't and say that is the only way or best way for others. There are a lot more people who dimension lumber with a tablesaw directly than your method.

I am saying all this for the benefit of someone who is just getting into woodworkng. I don't believe that a bandsaw is an adequate substitute for a tablesaw in most situations.

[Wilbur Pan]

Well that statement is where we disagree. You may have trouble ripping a board straight and square on a tablesaw but I don't....I am saying all this for the benefit of someone who is just getting into woodworking. I don't believe that a bandsaw is an adequate substitute for a tablesaw in most situations.

[Insert tongue firmly in cheek]

Well that statement is where we disagree. You may have trouble ripping a board straight and square on a bandsaw but I don't....I am saying all this for the benefit of someone who is just getting into woodworking. I don't believe that a tablesaw is an adequate substitute for a bandsaw in most situations.

======

Seriously, we should all remember just because we may have a workflow that we use to achieve a desired result, that does not invalidate other methods used to achieve the same end. Just because I am getting good results cutting square boards with my bandsaw does not mean that one can't do it on a tablesaw, and vice versa.

As far as smoothness of cut off of a bandsaw goes, I've found that not achieving a smooth cut on 1" stock or less on a bandsaw is most likely due to not using the right blade, and not due to problems with the bandsaw itself.

[Art Mann]

I won't argue the point any further. One can always justify one's decisions based on their own unassailable assumptions. I would just urge any inexperienced hobbiests who are trying to decide what equipment they need to contact experienced woodworkers doing the same kind of work they want to accomplish to help them with their decisions. A "hands on" demonstration would be the best. Anyone (including me) can say anthing they like on an internet forum with no proof and no risk to themselves.

[Jules Dominguez]

Paul, I have an old Rockwell 14" bandsaw and a new Sawstop. I don't have a joiner and would be hard-pressed to find space for one, so I use hand planes and sleds in combination with a planer and the tablesaw to get my boards straight, flat and to thickness. I prefer using a tablesaw to a bandsaw, maybe because I haven't spent a lot of time trying to improve my bandsaw and my bandsaw skills. I'll probably stick with the equipment and methods I have.

However, I hear you and believe that you can do exactly what you say you do with your tools. I think it comes down to what tools we've already invested dollars and learning in, how much extra space and dollars we might have to devote to new tools, and just personal preferences.

One thing I do have a strong personal preference about, is that I much prefer to cut dados with a tablesaw than with a router, although I own three routers, one of them 3 hp and mounted on a decent table. I use the routers only for those dados that I can't conveniently cut on the tablesaw.

Different strokes for different folks, and many ways to skin a cat, especially one made of wood.