Craftsman has come out with a new V20 Brushless RP cordless reciprocating saw, CMCS340.
The new Craftsman Brushless saw bears a strong resemblance to the Dewalt 20V Max Atomic reciprocating saw (DCS369B), which isn’t unexpected given that both tool brands are owned by Stanley Black & Decker.
What’s interesting is that the Craftsman saw has slightly bumped-up specs. The Dewalt has a 5/8” stroke length, and the Craftsman is spec’ed with a 3/4” stroke length. Both operate at up to 2800 cutting strokes per minute.
Advertisement
So, with comparable motor speed (in SPM), and slightly longer stroke length, the Craftsman could possibly perform better than the Dewalt.
Although, if the brushless motor is comparable, using the same power across a longer stroke length could potentially increase performance – with respect to application speed – in lighter duty tasks, but lower it in heavier duty tasks.
It is unclear how the Craftsman Brushless RP tool differs from the Dewalt. The Craftsman tool-only retails for $99 – or at least that’s what it is listed for at Lowe’s, and the Dewalt is $159 at Home Depot at the time of this posting.
Speaking as someone who purchased the Dewalt Atomic-series saw, I find myself asking – how is this new Craftsman saw different? What was done for the saw to land at a $99 price point compared to the now-$159 Dewalt?
The Dewalt Atomic isn’t starved for power, but it’s noticeably a lighter duty compact and convenient saw in use. Does the Craftsman saw perform like the Atomic, slightly better, or slightly lower due to the longer stroke length?
Is the Dewalt overpriced, or is the Craftsman an incredible bargain?
Advertisement
It’s also possible for this tool to be completely different from the Dewalt Atomic, but I see nothing to support this either way.
Critics will complain about the resemblances and ”lick and stick” cross-brand product development, but what is a Craftsman one-handed compact reciprocating saw supposed to look like? If a design works for Dewalt, it’s going to work for Craftsman.
Assuming there are large similarities or a high percentage of shared engineering between the two brands’ saws, there’s then the question about why we haven’t seen this Craftsman saw sooner. How is the answer to this influencing Craftsman’s cordless roadmap in a broader sense?
Is the Craftsman not a more consumer-targeted version of the Dewalt Atomic saw, which itself is a 20V Max version of Dewalt’s 12V Max Xtreme Subcompact saw of similar design, size, and performance?
All of this comes to mind because, well, what else is there to think about? That’s also why I don’t fault Craftsman for not sharing anything about the newest Brushless RP expansion.
This saw doesn’t look to do anything new or different, but I’d say it’s still a welcome expansion of the Craftsman V20 and Brushless RP lineup. I hope that Craftsman also adds a value-priced kit option in the future.
Key Features & Specs
- Brushless Motor
- 3/4″ stroke length
- 2800 SPM
- Variable speed trigger
- 12.75″ length (front to back)
- Weighs 3.2 lbs
- Pivoting Shoe
- LED work light
- Tool-free blade release
On their website, Craftsman advertises that the saw delivers ”up to 40% more power” with the fine print adding “compared to Craftsman brushed reciprocating saw CMCS300 by measuring the unit output measured in unit watts out (UWO) with CMCB202 2Ah battery. (sold separately)”
The new saw is compatible with Craftsman V20 cordless power tool batteries (not included).
Price: $99 (tool-only, CMCS340B)
There’s no information yet as to when the new Craftsman V20 Brushless RP saw will be available. Craftsman’s website only says that the saw is ”coming soon.”
Thank you to Big Richard for the find!
MM
Specs seem pretty standard. What I’d like to see more often on this class of saw is:
1) Needs to accept jigsaw blades in addition to recip saw blades.
2) Depth adjustment on the shoe.
Those developments have been out for a while now, there’s no reason that they shouldn’t be the norm.
As for how this fits in with the other SBD brands? Perhaps new-and-improved Dewalt models are on the way?
Big Richard
I would add to your list that a 4-way blade clamp on a tool like this would possibly be nice. These are all about maximum versatility over raw power/speed. So why not make as versatile as possible? DeWalt’s older compact recips DCS367/DCS387 had it, and it can make a difference in tight spaces. I sorta replaced my 367 with their new XR DCS382, but can’t quite get rid of it yet because of its 4 way balde clamp.
MM
That’s a great point. I have the DCS367 and that 4-way clamp is probably the feature I like most about it.
Bonnie
Heck, I had an old Craftsman jigsaw from the 90’s with both of these features.
Jared
I was about to add “depth adjustment” too. That would be a differentiating feature versus the competition.
I also wish most full-sized reciprocating saws had a wider range of adjustment. My cordless Ridgid Octane for example, it barely seems to make a difference.
Is there a reason, beyond convention, that manufacturers don’t make them adjust a few inches? I realize the tip of a long blade swings around quite a bit compared to the chuck, but I could still make use of a larger range of depth adjustment.
Jamie Lee Davis
About time.
Munklepunk
I really want the craftsman brand to be good again. If I were a casual tool user and didn’t need pro tools when i was buying I would probably buy their power tools.
Fyrfytr998
I am exactly in this situation. A casual DIY’er that found the 4ah Starter Pack sales at Lowes too good to pass up. Only I was able to get the better tools before they started making the lesser brushed tools the Free Gift options.
If HD was a closer store, I probably would have gone with Ryobi, but then again, the military discount helps a lot as well.
Fyrfytr998
I’m excited for this. My brushed two handed Craftsman recip has been a go to for all my tree trimming tasks this summer. So a one handed brushless model will be a welcome addition.
Steve
Sorry, you lost me at “Craftsman”. Dead, gone, and good riddance for me.
Fyrfytr998
The brushless DeWalt clones aren’t as bad as the brushed Porter clones.
Koko The Talking Ape
“with comparable motor speed (in SPM), and slightly longer stroke length, the Craftsman could possibly perform better than the Dewalt.”
I don’t want to be “that guy,” but is this statement really true? If the motor is the same, then a longer stroke means LESS force, because Energy equals Force x Distance. For the same Energy, more Distance means less force. Have I got that wrong?
If I were to use my bicycle to power a giant reciprocating saw (say, in a rustic saw mill), I could make the saw travel further by using a higher gear, because higher gears allow more distance per pedal rotation. But if the saw hits a nail or something, it might jam immediately, because there’s little force behind that saw blade. If I want to power through that kind of resistance, I want a LOWER gear, i.e., less distance per pedal rotation.
Am I wrong?
MM
Keep reading to Stuart’s next paragraph:
Although, if the brushless motor is comparable, using the same power across a longer stroke length could potentially increase performance – with respect to application speed – in lighter duty tasks, but lower it in heavier duty tasks.
The Craftsman saw is faster, and as you wrote, it also has less force. For an application where maximum force isn’t required then the Craftsman saw could be faster because of that longer stroke length. I think that’s what Stuart meant by “light duty applications”–things like pruning small branches or cutting 1x softwood which are nowhere close to maxing out the tool’s capabilities. Of course if the job is one where we are using the maximum force of the tool (thick or sticky materials, nail-embedded lumber, etc.) then the opposite is true and the Craftsman could bog or stall while another tool might keep on cutting.
It would be sweet to see someone come out with a recip saw that has either variable stroke length or a hi/lo range gearbox.
Stuart
If the tools are identical aside from stroke length, the energy consumption is going to be slightly different for both tools. But, the one with a higher stroke length is going to reach load limits faster than one with a stroke length.
So, as I understand it, the Craftsman might perform faster for light duty tasks, but bog down at a certain point where the Dewalt should be able to power through.
There are many influential factors built into both tools, none of which will be obvious outside of SBD’s engineering team.
Stroke length is usually fixed to a mechanical design, and so varying it would be very complex. It’s far easier to adjust the stroke rate.
Consider that the interaction between blade and workpiece is a factor of stroke length and motor speed. If you can control one of these parameters, what’s the benefit in also controlling the other?
If it helps, consider how the diameter of a wheel and rotational speed determine linear travel speed. It’s usually far easier to adjust the RPM than the wheel diameter.
MM
The benefit of mechanically changing the stroke length or using a multi-range gearbox is that it generates more mechanical advantage in the low range or short-stroke mode, whereas electronically varying the speed of the motor does no such thing. A lower gear range would also offer you more control if you are trying to maintain a particular speed for optimal cutting or to avoid the workpiece vibrating.
Stuart
The way I understand reciprocating saw mechanisms to work, changing the gears would change the SPM spec, and not the stroke length. The stroke length is akin to a crankshaft piston throw, which is mechanically fixed.
In difficult applications, altering the blade engagement angle, or swapping blades can be highly effective.
A shorter stroke length cuts slower.
Generally, the stroke length increases with tool size and motor power.
Reducing the stroke length of a heavy duty saw won’t really have practical benefits, as they’re usually designed for demanding applications in the first place.
I’m not convinced a shorter length with comparable motor speed would appreciably affect vibrations.
Overall, it’s not a bad idea, but I also don’t think there would be enough real-world gains for the added cost, complexity, tool size, and weight involved.
The same goes with sander and OMT oscillating angles.
MM
You are correct that changing the stroke length would change SPM only. It is also possible to change the stroke length, though that is more cumbersome. One way to do it would be to change the location of the crank pin; that is how a shaper is adjusted (the metalworking version, not the glorified router used for woodwork) Another way to do it would be to use an angular drive and vary the angle between the motor and the drive, when the motor is in line with the blade you have zero stroke, when the motor is at 90 degrees to the blade you have maximum stroke. Either of those methods can produced additional force on the blade and more control at lower speeds. It’s the exact same reason why drills have low gears even though you could run at the same speeds in the highest gear.
Now I do agree that changing the stroke is cumbersome and complicated at best so that’s probably not going to happen, I just mentioned it for the sake of completeness as adding a low range would not be the only way to increase force at the blade.
One great point of comparison that I can think of is bandsaws. I love the old DoAll saws with the mechanical gearshift. They have shift lever just like a mechanical transmission in a car, when you want to cut at slow blade speeds (fpm) you shift to a lower gear. This is a tiny bit more hassle than a modern saw with an electronic variable speed drive–on those you can just twist a knob, no need to shift gears. But, the electronic variable models have the same power no matter what. Try and cut something very thick and they stall. The DoAll will not do that; put it in low gear and it has an amazing amount of torque, you can cut a 6″ thick aluminum block with a 3tpi blade and it never slows down.
Stuart
More powerful saws typically have a longer cutting stroke length, lighter duty saws typically have a shorter stroke length.
Let’s simplify things.
Take your foot and slide it on the floor, for a length of 6 inches. Now do it again, but slide your foot for 12 inches.
The energy loss is going to be frictional. In the most simplistic sense, the longer the distance you drag your foot on the floor, the greater the frictional energy losses.
Saws are more complicated, but have a similarly proportionate relationship between stroke length and energy losses.
If everything else is equal – battery, motor, gearing, etc, but one tool has a slightly different mechanism that gives it a longer stroke length, performance might be comparable up to a point, at which the longer stroke length saw might bog down.
If the specs were reversed, I would hypothesize that the Dewalt might have a larger motor or could draw more energy from the battery. But that’s not the case here – the less expensive and consumer-targeted Craftsman tool is the better-spec’ed one.
So, what’s going on? As an end user, this raises an eyebrow.
Franck B.
I’m more excited about the 8-compartment and 20-compartment Versastack organizers (Tstak compatible). Hopefully they are priced well, however with the price increases on Tradestack and Versastack, I’m not sure that will be the case. The current Versastack organizers, the same as the Tstak 2.0 IP54 version that I think still isn’t available in the US, were a good deal at release since they were under $20. They have a lot of extra material and are strong, so they’re good for heavy pieces, and I use them for metal stuff. I used to use them for electrical connectors but it was overkill, so these new lighter weight ones should be appropriate to hold this lightweight stuff, and appropriately priced.
But about the saw: looking at the profile of the Craftsman v. the Dewalt, they do not appear to share much lineage. Some Craftsman tools are lifted straight out of the Dewalt catalog with a tweaked battery mount. Some use a lot of the same parts, sometimes with changed color (the battery operated fan has the same fan blade part). I didn’t check the part numbers on the DCF887 but I would bet the motor is the same as in the CMCF820, despite a difference in specs. I have a new housing coming for my trashed DCF887 so I’ll have everything apart and check it out. The corded tools have even more of a family appearance than the cordless. BUT … this saw has a very different appearance than the Dewalt. For example, the blade shoe, a prime candidate for part sharing, is completely different.
Anyhow, I really prefer the 4-way clamp on the older Dewalt saws. The 2-way rotary (Sawzall-style) clamp that Dewalt/Craftsman uses on the Atomic and newer compact style saws is weak and not suited to heavy-duty use (the blade comes loose in high-abuse situations).
Stuart
I haven’t seen any new Craftsman Versastack organizers – are they new, and not just the same system fitted with 3D printed inserts? https://toolguyd.com/craftsman-versastak-organizer-lower-profile-better-space-utilization/
A bunch of readers have been complaining about not being able to find Versastack tool boxes or combos anywhere, and asked it the system was discontinued. Expansion would be nice.
Alex
I hadn’t heard of any new organizers either so I did some digging and found these:
https://www.craftsman.com/product/cmst17828/versastack-20-compatment-organizer
https://www.craftsman.com/product/cmst17827/versastack-compatible-8-compartment-organizer?tid=
Both have dividers rather than removable bins. They look to be an interesting addition to the Versastack/Tstak family. Neither appears to be available for purchase yet though.
Franck B.
Those are the ones. They’re clearly different because they don’t have the standard Tstak/Versastack dual-mold handle, and instead use a plastic strap handle like on the Dewalt Pro Small Parts organizers. So they’re clearly for lightweight items.
However, I don’t care for the “closing latch locks boxes together” as used on the Toughcase+ (i.e. small/medium Versastack) boxes. Whether I am just trying to disconnect a box or open it, the action gives both results. And the intermediary Versastack boxes have the same Toughcase+ latches, since those stick up above the top, they’re always being knocked open. So I prefer to carry the small TC+ boxes in the Tstak caddy (five in each caddy). My UK supplier for the caddy has it marked on clearance though.
Alex
Agreed wholeheartedly on the “closing latch locks boxes together” thing. I’ve also noticed that while I have a surlpus of bins from both tstaks and the Dewalt 10 bin organizers that I don’t always use, the bins do come in handy for screws, etc when working on projects. It’s nice to be able to pull the bin of whatever type of screw and take it with you.
Franck B.
(something in the site is putting “+” in place of spaces… my moderated comment can be deleted!)
Stuart
I’ve been looking into this, and there hasn’t been anything on my end that could be doing this. My running theory is that a browser update is messing with saved names in local cookies or something similar.
MM
If it helps, I did not notice any nonsense with the + signs when I visit your site from my PC using Firefox. However, on my tablet, using Chrome, I saw it yesterday afternoon/evening.
Stuart
@Mike – plus signs are often used in place of empty spaces in URLs, but not text forms.
I can’t tell if this is maybe an iOS bug, mobile Chrome bug, or something else. I haven’t changed anything in the backend that could do this.
I’ve seen a bit of activity in the moderation panel (John Doe and John+Doe are treated as different people, and first-time commentors always go through manual moderation), but there’s no way to determine commonality without polling everyone.
Deleting the plus sign seems to update the cookie. I’ve been checking for bug finds or discussions online, but haven’t found anything yet.
Franck B.
My configuration where it appeared, if it helps: Firefox on macos 10.x (either 10.14 or 10.15, I forget which machine I was on).