Why ask about tool quality? Here's one reason.

[Dave Morris]

Questions come up asking for input about certain tools all the time. Beginning woodworkers ask because they seek information they have not had the chance to learn through experience. Experienced woodworkers ask because they value the input received from others with equal or more experience. Even the Masters can learn from others. Me? I've got a few projects under my belt, but I'm always yearning to learn more.

While I agree that a talented woodworker can turn out exquisite results with so-so tools, many of us need all the help we can get as we learn how to create with our hands in wood what our mind sees in thought. The process can be slow, frustrating, filled with despair, accented with strong language, and generate a lot of firewood. It can be also be joy, pride, and the confidence to take on a more challenging project.

However, asking about tool quality doesn't mean I want something to do the job for me, it means I want to know if the tool can do the job for which it is designed. Does it work? Does it work well, or not so well? Will it stand up over time, or will I be throwing my money away in the long run? Nothing brings a project to a halt faster than a tool that breaks doing what it's supposed to do without breaking. Many tool attributes and deficiencies are visible upon inspection. Sometimes, it's what you "can not" see that bites you.

Example: A bandsaw sliding tension mechanism "shaft hinge" for the upper wheel. It looks fine, the company certainly doesn't say it's of poor quality when they sell the tool, but the consumer doesn't have any way to check what he or she can not see with their own eyes. Below are two parts to an older bandsaw, the one on the right is the original part that has cracked in half, the one on the left is it's new replacement. I don't want to say what brand of saw it is, because I an NOT trying to badmouth any particular brand. Following posts show close up shots. The part broke while in use, under proper tension according to the gauge, and while using the tool according to the manual's instructions. This broken part isn't exactly what I'd call an example of "quality". It's a wonder it didn't fail a long ago. Hopefully, the replacement part has more inner beauty than it's older sibling.

But I hope when others see a post asking about the *quality* of a tool, which brand is good, better, best, or how to determine if a tool is worth the money spent (be it for just the next project, or for a number of years), they will understand that the person asking the question values their input about the tool. None of us started out as an expert woodworker. Many of us, myself included, will never be an "expert". Woodworking gets shoe-horned between a lot of other demands on my time, but the few hours I have to work wood are worth a lot to me. My best hope is that I learn enough knowledge, and develop enough skill, to build things from wood that will bring happiness to those I love. If I can build them well enough that they will be handed down to the next generation, so much the better. Can I do a whole project right now with just a saw, handplane, and chisel? Nope, no way. For me, the power tools I buy let me turn my creative thoughts into reality. If the unseen quality of the tool isn't there to begin with, I'd rather know ahead of time and purchase a different tool.

Not directed at anyone in particular, just food for thought. We all learn from each other, that's why we ask questions. I've learned a heck of a lot over the years through this and other forums, but I don't expect to ever know enough that I can't learn something new.

[Dave Morris]

Here is what the metal looks like below the surface. The dark spots in the metal are voids in the casting.

[Dave Morris]

Close-up of the break. Granted, the tool is some years old, but how can you tell if the new tool you are thinking of buying has a flaw such as this below it's shiny new paint? That's where the company's reputation, and even more so, the input of other woodworkers can help a person make an informed decision when purchasing a new tool.

Thanks for reading.

Dave

[Tim Sproul]

This type of defect is also common in knock-off golf club heads.

Lots of voids and such in the knock-offs and none in Ping's.

At least with a golf club head and some experience hitting golf balls, you can feel/hear/experience the difference. I'd wager the part broke due to fatigue of the metal combined with the voids in the casting. If the casting was good, then fatigue wouldn't have caused breakage until many more uses.

[Kyle Kraft]

Looks like in this case, destructive testing is a good way to view the flaws hidden beneath the shiny paint. From the outside, one would never suspect the porosity you found within. Seems like the folks with more die casting experience than me could shed some light on this. Is there a way to vacuum de-gas the metal during the die casting process??

[Rob Will]

Well said Dave

Rob

[Chuck Lenz]

I had the same thing happen with my JET 14" bandsaw. I called JET about geting a new one and inquired why it cracked and bent, the answer I got was that your not supose to leave the tension on the blade when your done for the day. So I said, well ok, then why doesn't it mention that in the owners manual ? The reply was, we will look into geting it writen into the manual. So I left it at that and ordered the new part. When I recieved the new part I put the old part next to the new part and to little suprise the new part had been beefed up in the area where the old part had failed. I may have got a better part now, but the whole ordeal left a sour taste with me, and cost me $50 because JET had a faulty initial part design in my opinion and wouldn't cover it. Not to mention the down time I had on the saw till the part got here also.

[Brad Townsend]

Great post. Sadly, we encounter this cheapening of goods to serve the bottom line every day. The other day, I had the tailgate latch of my 2003 Ford Ranger snap off in my hand. Up to that point, I hadn't even taken notice that the darn thing was plastic! To add insult to injury, the dealer wanted $80 for a replacement (I ordered one off the internet for $30).

I suspect a large part of the blame for this is the consumer who buys primarily on price and does little or no research on quality. One of the things I admire about woodworkers is that, as a group, they demand quality and are willing to pay for it.

As for the golf club analogy; while I agree with Tim's assertion, the void in my game makes any void in my clubhead a moot issue.

[Andrew Williams]

This brings to light fundamental issues about the way our society is going...

I always ask myself "Why am I doing this business endeavor?" and the answer always comes back to something akin to love, or a personal need to achieve something, or perhaps just the joy of the work itself. It is very rare, although sometimes necessary, for me to take a job simply because I need the money. I never do any business for the sole purpose of making money.

So many of the product names that we have come to know and trust were started this way. Usually by someone who, for them, the making of this product represented a piece of their soul, cast out into the world, and in the hopes that it's quality would show, and be duly compensated for. They would then hope that the compensation would be enough so that they may continue doing what they loved to do, which is build these things.

So many of these products are now being sold by companies which share only two major characterstics with the aforementioned people: the name, and the type of product. I have heard it said countless times that business people are in business to "make money". I find this an sad commentary on our society, especially in light of the fact that it has not only become standard procedure, but something that is encouraged and taught to our children. Anyone with a reasonable amount of logic can figure out that one can make far more money by simply making products that appear to be the same, and do the same job as a quality product, but are manufactured with cheap materials, cheap labor, and certainly no love of the process. The only love here is the love of the profits, not the process. This is a dramatic reversal of the Smithian sense of economics, where money used to actually represent a medium of exchange for goods and services, a direct barometer of value, rather than today's economics. Today, money is the goal in and of itself. The fact that a product will self-destruct in a short time is looked upon as a good thing, because buyers have been conditioned to expect that, and then funnel more money to the vendor for more flawed goods.

If you take a look at some large corporate entities, see how the people at the top always seem to move from one company to another, regardless of what the company produces. It is as if you could have an imaginary conversation over drinks in a bar with a major multinational CEO...

"So what do you do?"
"I run a large corporation."
"What do you make?"
"I don't know and I don't care"
"You mean it doesn't matter to you how you spend your time as long as you make a profit?"
"Bingo!"

This is just a thought-exercise of course, but it illustrates something which I percieve to be very real. If we continue to treat life as some sort of card game where the only goal is to collect the "pot", how will we be able to enjoy the process of anything? Seems that we would all be too busy making money to be distracted by little insignificant things like life, love, the pursuit of happiness, or the simple pleasure of a job well done.

[Pete Bradley]

II called JET about geting a new one and inquired why it cracked and bent, the answer I got was that your not supose to leave the tension on the blade when your done for the day.

Coming up with some bogus way to blame the customer for a faulty part is another indicator of the vendor's quality.

Pete

[Quesne Ouaques]

Hi Dave:

As a relative novice who asks lots of dumb questions, I appreciate this post.

I also appreciate the "tool quality" discussion, in general. Over the past few years, I have noticed many limitations in some of the low quality tools I've bought or inherited.

[Dave Morris]

I had the same thing happen with my JET 14" bandsaw. .... When I recieved the new part I put the old part next to the new part and to little suprise the new part had been beefed up in the area where the old part had failed. I may have got a better part now, but the whole ordeal left a sour taste with me, and cost me $50 because JET had a faulty initial part design in my opinion and wouldn't cover it. Not to mention the down time I had on the saw till the part got here also.

Chuck, I agree completely. Question--- in what manner was/is the new part beefed up? Both my old part and the new part "look" identical. No telling if the casting is of higher quality on the new part. I wonder if packing the spaces between the ribs on my new replacement part with JB Weld might not be a bad idea. An ounce of prevention, so to speak.

Just for clarification to the thread: The reason I do not wish to say what brand of saw this came from is it's an older model not presently on the showroom floor, and quality control may have (hopefully WILL have) improved at the present time. I'm trying to give the company the benefit of the doubt. However, if this had happened to a new tool, or this new replacement part breaks in the same manner, I'd have no qualms about revealing the brand name.

[Garth Keel]

Dave, I not only appreciate your bringing this subject to our attention, but I really enjoy reading a well written essay whatever the subject. Yours is the best I have read in quite a while.

[Chuck Lenz]

Dave, how it was beefed up is instead of it being hollow in that particular area, it was solid and thick, filled in, as in a new complete casting, they also added a horizontal rib about half way down on the right side if you look closely. The part number has changed from 100016J to 100016ACP also, but 100016J is still cast into the new part. They had put a sticker on the new part with the new number on it.

[Greg Peterson]

Andrew, you're partly correct in that corporations are in business to make money. The part you overlooked is who are they making this money for.

They are bulking up their bottom line to attract investors. Who are these investors? You, me, the guy next door, your co-workers, friends and family.

It has become a self perpetuating economic engine. We power this engine in part, through unchecked consumerism. As a society, we buy many goods that we really do not 'need'. Chalk one up for advertisers. Used to be called "Keeping up with the Jones".

The other way we power this self perpetuating economic engine is through our actions as investors. Publicly traded companies are competing both in the marketplace and on Wall Street. As a consumer, they want you to buy their goods and services. As an investor, they want you to invest in their company that provides goods and services.


Perhaps I am a little cynical. Okay, a lot cynical. It's a paradox at this point. As long as consumers value price over quality and investors value short return on investment, we are, with ever increasing speed, painting ourselves into a corner. The wants and needs of consumers and investors are diametrically opposed.

It has been all to easy getting to this point. How we break the cycle is the question that needs to be asked.