14 or 17 inch bandsaw

[Tom Hassad]

I am starting to look seriously at getting a new bandsaw. I have a piece of junk 14 inch HF bandsaw. Besides length of table surface, how do you differentiate the 14 inch vs. 17 inch saws when certain models have the same HP as the bigger 17 inch models.

I want enough power and clearance to resaw up to 12 inches. I have read enough reviews to see some claim they get by with the 14 inch models. If you took money out of the equation but wanted performance to justify going with 17 inch over 14 inch in terms of extra costs - should I go with a 14 inch or 17 inch. Most of the uses will be to resaw but I would like to use thin blades to do nice curve work too. I will need to re-wire my garage for 220 volts but I don't want that to stop me from looking at all options. My experience with the HF bandsaw convinced me that I need power and accuracy. I put good blades in the HF and still had bad resaw results.

I don't want to have to buy a saw and then put on a riser block to get the necessary resaw height but I know some bandsaws, even at 14 inch, provide enough height. I just don't know how to differentiate them from the 17 inch models or what I get with the larger models when they have the same HP (besides the larger size between frame and saw blade).
Thanks, Tom.

[Mike Lipke]

It depends what you use it for.
I just sold my 14" 1hp BS with a riser block for a bigger model.

Why?
It worked well on smaller, even medium work, but I use it for making blanks, and running a 12" log thru the thing, even with the biggest blade, 3tpi, going soooo slow, it would bog down and generally make me know that I was pushing it's limits to the max.

Sorta like towing a houseboat with an Escort. It will do it, but boy do you know its back there. Just doesn't feel right.

So, bought a saw I should have bought the first time. 5hp, with a 16" vertical capacity. Do I need 5 hp? Prolly not. 3hp would be ok, but this saw comes with 5hp, and boy does it cut.

What size paint brush should I buy? Depends if I am painting a house or a rocking chair. What do you cut mostly (or even sometimes)?

[Guy Belleman]

and never look back.

Check out all of the other many bandsaw threads.

[Leigh Betsch]

I don't know where you are located but if you are close to PA check out the for sale forum for the :Centauro 24" bandsaw SE PA. That is one heck of a saw for cheap. My MiniMax 20 is made by Centauro.

[Grant Vanbokklen]

Band Saws take up a very small foot print really. Keep your eye out for something good. There is an AGAZANNI 18" BANDSAW for sale on CL in Berkley California, asking $1500

[Loren Hedahl]

Since you indicate resawing would be your major use, I would think you would want to make your decision based on optimizing that operation. A 17 inch saw would be a significant step up in performance over a 14 inch, in my mind, and a 20 inch would carry that even further.

On the other hand, changing blade sizes for scrolling, which includes resetting guides or sometimes changing guide styles can be tedious. The advantage of a large saw for resawing doesn't carry over to scrolling work except for the increased throat depth that would permit working with larger pieces.

In my case I had an old aluminum frame 12 inch Craftsman that I replaced with a Delta 14. A rainy day a year or so later I felt pity on the Craftsman and spent a day going through a complete alignment, correcting all the little deficiencies with everything set up for narrow blade cutting. It has turned out to be a dandy little saw and now I wish I had gone with a larger saw than the Delta 14.

That's just my experience that you may be able to benefit from.

[Tom Hassad]

To answer Mike's question - I don't really use a bandsaw and never have resawed after getting miserable results with my HF bandsaw. I did cut arcs in pieces or tried to cut tapers then cleaned it up on the jointer. I anticipate if I bought a bandsaw I would try resawing. I just don't understand how a 17 inch is better than a 14 inch when they have the same HP - should I be looking at bigger horsepower for a bandsaw to go with a size higher than 14 inch?

[Mike Lipke]

You will find a BS with a 17" wheel is much more rigid in the frame than a 14" with a riser block. That affects blade tension and alignment.
More HP is necessary for taller resaw.

[Cary Falk]

You can tension a wider blade sufficiently. There is more weight so there is less vibration. My 14" Delta had a vibration problem. A 17" is in a different class of tool than a 14" Cast iron C frame band saw. It isn't just about 4". I also have the G0513x2 and love it. It is like going from a contractor saw to a cabinet saw.

[Curt Harms]

If you're buying primarily for resawing, I'd go with a 17"+. I have a Rikon 10-325 14" with 13" resaw and it works but if you have the room and ability to move the saw to its home, bigger is most likely better. If you have the room (again) keep your existing saw for curved cuts and to abuse with nonferrous metal etc. It can get tiresome changing blades.

[glenn bradley]

To answer Mike's question - I don't really use a bandsaw and never have resawed after getting miserable results with my HF bandsaw. I did cut arcs in pieces or tried to cut tapers then cleaned it up on the jointer. I anticipate if I bought a bandsaw I would try resawing. I just don't understand how a 17 inch is better than a 14 inch when they have the same HP - should I be looking at bigger horsepower for a bandsaw to go with a size higher than 14 inch?

With the price so close between a 14" that has a 12" height (Rikon 10-325 at about $900) and a 17" (Grizzly G0513 at about $770 or the X2 at about $1000), I guess I would second Guy's remark "Get the 17" Grizzly 0513x2and never look back."

All our needs and methods of work differ so there is rarely a "best" answer. If you do go with a 17" the G0513's, like the G0490 and the 1023 is one of Grizzly's tools that gets consistently good reviews from owners. I have the G0513X which is no longer made but, becomes a G0513X2 if I swap a couple parts . . . it was a "tweener" model.

Just to add to the confusion, many fine pieces have been posted here by folks who have older cast iron 14" models that they have put riser blocks on. I love my 17" and keep a smaller saw for curvy stuff so I like both. I'm sure you'll get some ore definite responses and hopefully they will help.

[John Thompson]

Any BS will cut curves but.. when you get to very large BS's the large bearings make it a bit more task for scrolling. A 14" with riser will re-saw but.. not as well as a larger BS that is heavier to reduce vibration... has larger springs to handle bi-metal and carbide blades and a back-frame that is more ridgid to compliment the springs.

I have a 14" that I leave a 1/4" 6 tpi blade on for curves. I have a Steel City 18" I leave a 3/4" Lennox bi-metal on.. therefore I don't have to change blades and both are more suited for the blades on board. If I could have only one BS.. I want one that will not only cut curves efficiently but re-saw just as efficiently.

I would chose one in the 17"-20" range with the 17" and 18" standing out as about all you really need to do both very well.

Good luck...

Sarge..

[Frederick Wilt]

I decided to upgrade from a 14" to a 17". Very glad I did. Totally different animal. I went with the G0636X. No regrets.

[David Keller NC]

"I just don't understand how a 17 inch is better than a 14 inch when they have the same HP - should I be looking at bigger horsepower for a bandsaw to go with a size higher than 14 inch?"

There are some subtle differences between a 17" and a 14" saw with the same HP motor - as others have mentioned, the bigger saw is likely to have better guides/bearings, will accomodate wider blades (usually, a 14" saw will not take a 1" wide blade), and the castings tend to be heavier, which makes them more rigid.

But you have not answered a question posed to you earlier on the thread - what do you want to resaw? If you're a box-builder (like jewelry boxes, humidors, etc...) and need to slice relatively short pieces of nice wood that are usually less than 8" in height, then a 14" or 17" (low-end) bandsaw will be just dandy. If you're going to be re-sawing 12" wide maple 12/4 boards 6 feet long or more, then even a 17" 3 HP bandsaw is not enough. You'd be much better off getting a bandsaw that's intended primarily for re-saw and has the horsepower, guides, and rgidity to do it.

Just about every manufacturer makes a model designed to do this - including (famously) Laguna, Rikon, Delta, Powermatic, Jet, and Grizzly. And honestly, unless you buy a high-end brand like Laguna or you have low expectations, you're likely to have to do a bit of tweaking to the saw to get the best performance out of it anyway, so it probably doesn't matter a whole lot what brand you buy.

This is why it's important to ignore the "buy brand X, I have it and love it!!!" type of posts. These are generally useless to you, because every poster has a value system that's propbably different than yours. There are lots and lots of posters to this site and others that are simply cheap, and will never spend the money to buy anything but the lowest end of tool in particular class, regardless of performance/quality tradeoffs. There are also those (but fewer in number on internet forums) that will not tolerate even the slightest defect in performance out of a tool, and will complain loudly about whatever that defect is, even though a lot of us would just shrug our shoulders and keep cutting.

What's considerably more important is matching the size/class of the tool to your needs, and not to try to make any one tool do everything. Bandsaws, in particular, suffer from this syndrome. Generally speaking, it's better to have a narrow-throat, large vertical capacity resaw and a second bandsaw that's low horsepower and light duty for cutting curves than it is to have a single, large saw with a large throat capacity and a lot of vertical cutting height, because such a saw will be much heavier, much more costly, and have a very long band (which are more expensive to replace).

[William Falberg]

Tom: The only difference between a 14" and a 17" is 1.5" of wheel radius.

Mike: What you have is a vertical saw mill with limited cut depth and without the log feeder.

Guy: Let's really confuse Tom.

Loren: What you're saying is that set-up is critical to performance and the easier the set-up, the better the saw.

Tom: A 14" cast iron wheel requires more HP than a 17" aluminum wheel. It's not the size but the weight.

Mike: Wheel diameter has nothing to do with frame rigidity, riser or not. Neither factor affects blade tension (that's a function of the spring) or alignment (a design factor). More HP is required for wider blades and heavier wheels and has nothing to do with cut depth.

Cary: IF you can properly tension a wider blade depends on springs and frame. Weight has nothing to do with vibration. Balance does; it also helps if the wheels and tires are round.

Curt: If you want to specialize in re-sawing - get the deepest cut depth you can find with enough frame to super-tension a 1" blade and enough HP to force-feed a 16" oak log. If you want versatility look for a BS with easy and multiple conversion options relative to blade guides and tension mechanisms.

From 8" "toy" bandsaws to 25HP mills the individual components of a band saw cutting solution should be "proportional" to the job at hand. Most band saws out there have frames that could be converted into rock-crushers but the disparities in component "proportion" are huge. It's a marketing thing but watch out for the "wow" factor. Like "wow!, it has 5 HP" ; it means nothing if you can't cut more than 12" anyway.