SawStop is a series of table saws that feature a relatively unique safety mechanism.
How SawStop Works
- Sensors in the table saw actively monitor the conductive or capacitive properties of the materials in contact with the blade
- Sensors detect a shift from wood to flesh
- Power to the motor is turned off
- An aluminum brake is applied to the spinning saw blade
- Braking force drops the blade below the surface of the table
- User must purchase a $69 replacement brake cartridge and a new blade
Personally, I have mixed feelings about the SawStop. It does nothing to reduce kickback or potential injuries, and may even promote careless tool use. Take a look at the demo video below. Not only is there no safety guard, the blade height is improperly adjusted!
We’re going to be talking about the SawStop a bit more in coming days. Its inventor, Stephen Gass, has been heavily lobbying for government officials to force all other table saw manufacturers to license the technology for use in their own saws.
There are a few mistakes in your post. First off, if your SawStop is triggered by flesh (and the blade cartridge stores data on what triggered it), SawStop will replace the cartridge for free. If you do something stupid, like touch the blade with a piece of metal while it’s cutting, you pay for a new cartridge.
Second: the sawstop saws come with a great blade guard, and a riving knife for use when the blade guard is in the way. You can change or remove the guard/riving knife in under 30 seconds with no tools.
The video you linked was to show what happens when the SawStop touches “flesh” or flesh-like objects. Not to show proper table-saw safety.
SawStop may replace the cartridge for free. I didn’t see any guarantees. Even with a free replacement, there’s the cost of a new blade. Granted, the cost of a new blade is far less than the cost of living with permanent injury.
I made no claims about the SawStop’s guard or riving knife, only that its use may lead to careless practices.
It is irrelevant that the demonstration videos are not intended to show proper table saw safety. In demonstrating a new gun sight, is it not prudent to check the weapon and follow proper safety procedures? Or should all that be thrown to the wind just that’s not the main focus? In many other demonstrations where safety measures are removed, there’s at least a disclaimer.
The SawStop is impressive, but I don’t like corporate bullies or companies that seek to stifle competitive innovation in pursuit of their own profits.
David Butler’s Whirlwind seems like a promising alternative to sawstop, good thing is it can be applied to existing saws.
I can’t imagine why anyone would consider buying a product from a producer who’s trying to get the government to FORCE you to buy his product. I neither want nor need a Sawstop, but even if I wanted and needed one I still wouldn’t buy it. I prefer not to support people who want to deny me the freedom to choose what I want to buy.
one day a blade is gonna break and injure someone. then what ? yep, this is like forcing everyone to buy a mercedes cuz their “safer”, cost be damned.
Last Fall when I chatted it up with someone at Volvo, I was surprised to hear that they shared their 3-point seat belt design with all competitors a few decades ago, without asking for any royalties or licensing information. Just saying.
I must say that I’m betwixt and between on this issue. While I’m not in favor of more government regulation and I’m a proponent of individual choice – I can see many other examples of where we have taken action for a greater societal good – or to ameliorate what would otherwise be an unacceptable societal cost. It is obvious that we struggle with these sort of things – outlawing marijuana – but allowing cigarettes, making some drugs elicit – while allowing others. Mandating safety features on our cars and baby carriages might have some analogy to the case at hand. But what would we have done if there had been only one patent holder for the original seat belt – and one who had locked-up the IP in such a way that all the car companies could only buy from him? In this hypothetical example the supposed patent-holder would certainly have had the right to make money from his invention – just as the maker of the Saw Stop does now. Are there other alternatives? Certainly the addition of more practical blade guards and riving knives has made the table saw safer. In the shop – automating the ripping process with power feeders – and the crosscutting task with sliding tables has also helped – and going to NC machines in a production mode take this a step beyond. But these are only applicable to jobsites where you can set up a large production shop if at all. For work at smaller jobsites – we usually bring a jobsite saw – not a dedicated rip saw or sliding table beast. Compounding the issue is worker training – or more likely the lack of any. High school woodshop is a thing of the past – and there is sometimes too much emphasis placed on worker productivity to allow true apprenticeship to adequately teach all tasks. The best tool is just that – a tool – and no guarantee of either safety or craftsmanship.
With all of this said – those of us concerned about personal and worker safety in a litigious society would certainly like some better clarity on this issue. Having the option to buy the Saw Stop technology in a portable jobsite saw – not just a cabinet saw or “contractors saw” – would give us the chance to choose. We make other tool-buying decisions – not entirely based on price – so why not on this mainstay of carpentry – if we can be given the facts in a dispassionate way from credible sources.