LumberJocks

Cheap TS blades

  • Advertise with us

« back to Safety in the Woodworking Shop forum

Forum topic by Eric posted 12-29-2011 02:35 AM 1233 views 0 times favorited 19 replies Add to Favorites Watch
View Eric's profile

Eric

216 posts in 1978 days


12-29-2011 02:35 AM

I’ve been using a cheap 7 1/4 circular saw blade (Menards with rebate) in my table saw for rough cutting. I realize I lose a little bit a potential blade height, but otherwise does anyone know any safety issues with this? My motor is a 1.5hp at 3450 RPM. The blade is rated for up to 6000 RPM. The pullies appear to be approximately a 1:1 ratio so I’m getting 3500 RPM at the blade.

-- Eric


19 replies so far

View ShopTinker's profile

ShopTinker

884 posts in 2235 days


#1 posted 12-29-2011 03:36 AM

I’ve used 7 1/4” blades in my 9” table saw for 20 years and have never had a problem. I think my driver pulley is a little smaller then the driven, so mine would turn a little slower than yours. It’s natural for us to adjust our feed rate for the type of blade and speed that it cuts. 7 1/4” blade has a smaller circumference so the number of teeth per second contacting the wood is lower and must be fed a little slower then a larger diameter blade.

-- Dan - Valparaiso, Indiana, "A smart man changes his mind, a fool never does."

View fussy's profile

fussy

980 posts in 2518 days


#2 posted 12-29-2011 04:26 AM

Eric,

Another advantage is you can get much thinner ker blades for cutting small pieces or cutting special wood.

Steve

-- Steve in KY. 44 years so far with my lovely bride. Think I'll keep her.

View a1Jim's profile

a1Jim

115206 posts in 3044 days


#3 posted 12-29-2011 04:27 AM

I don’t see a problem with it.

-- http://artisticwoodstudio.com Custom furniture

View jusfine's profile

jusfine

2405 posts in 2393 days


#4 posted 12-29-2011 05:07 AM

Dan, I guess I was never that good at math, but I would think that a 7 1/4” blade w 40 teeth vs a 10” blade with 40 teeth would have a faster contact rate as the teeth are closer together on a smaller surface… no?

-- Randy "You are judged as much by the questions you ask as the answers you give..."

View gfadvm's profile

gfadvm

14940 posts in 2157 days


#5 posted 12-29-2011 05:47 AM

I have used those ultra thin kerf DeWalt circsaw blades in my Grizz hybrid when I needed to cut a really thin kerf in something and have had no problems. They cut remarkably well.

-- " I'll try to be nicer, if you'll try to be smarter" gfadvm

View ShopTinker's profile

ShopTinker

884 posts in 2235 days


#6 posted 12-29-2011 05:52 AM

Jusfine, Your right, if both blades had 40 teeth. The teeth on the 7.25” blade would be about 1” apart and the teeth on the 10” blade would be about 2” apart, so there would be more teeth in contact with the wood with the 7.25” blade at any time. The number of teeth per second would be the same.

I was thinking about your standard cheap rip or crosscut saw blade. There are more teeth on a 10” blade and they are moving faster as they contact the wood. A 7.25” blade with 40 teeth and a 10” blade with the same tooth spacing would have 76 teeth , thus the 7.25” blade would have fewer teeth per second contacting he wood.

-- Dan - Valparaiso, Indiana, "A smart man changes his mind, a fool never does."

View cabmaker's profile

cabmaker

1507 posts in 2276 days


#7 posted 12-29-2011 06:03 AM

I have cut severals miles of material using a 7 1/4 in lieu of a ten inch without incident. enjoy

View TCCcabinetmaker's profile

TCCcabinetmaker

930 posts in 1822 days


#8 posted 12-29-2011 06:26 AM

As long as the arbor is the same then you should be fine.

Personally I go for the middle price range blades, they hold up, and well I don’t have to buy them that often.

-- The mark of a good carpenter is not how few mistakes he makes, but rather how well he fixes them.

View Eric's profile

Eric

216 posts in 1978 days


#9 posted 12-29-2011 04:39 PM

Thanks everyone. I agree the mid-priced blades are pretty good, but you can’t argue with a $1 circ blade… even if its only good for 1 project. I like the cheapies for rough cuts and save my mid-priced Avanti for final finish cuts.

-- Eric

View jerkylips's profile

jerkylips

273 posts in 2037 days


#10 posted 12-29-2011 04:56 PM

I have to comment on this. No offense, but it kind of cracks me up that you posted, “I’ve been doing this for a while – is it safe?”. You may want to ask that question earlier in the process next time.. ;)

View Eric's profile

Eric

216 posts in 1978 days


#11 posted 12-29-2011 05:18 PM

I see what you mean Jerky. :-) The whole thing started with a crazy idea… lets put a cheap circ blade on the TS for the tough cutting. I said to myself… OK I’ll try it THIS ONCE. Well things went ok and its started to become the norm in my garage.

-- Eric

View jusfine's profile

jusfine

2405 posts in 2393 days


#12 posted 12-29-2011 07:08 PM

Thanks Dan!

Eric, I guess I got off the topic a bit when I read Dan’s response, but I have also done this with a tablesaw on a jobsite. I did quit buying cheap blades when 3 of the carbide teeth flew off during a prolonged ripping session.

Luckily nobody was hurt but it did give me a scare.

-- Randy "You are judged as much by the questions you ask as the answers you give..."

View Dallas's profile

Dallas

3599 posts in 1954 days


#13 posted 12-29-2011 07:55 PM

Like most others here, I’ve done the 7 1/4” in a 10” saw, but it finally dawned on me that it was false economy. The blade wore out a lot faster and I was always buying new blades. It could have had something to do with the wood I was cutting, either pitchy pine or some crappy hardwood, but I think it had more to do with making the blade do what it wasn’t meant to do. I started buying the Irwin Marathon 10” blades for about $20 and they last a lot longer. My cost for 7 1/4” blades was averaging about $10/ea. and I could go through 3 or 4 of them for every $20 10” blade. I think it has to do with the gullet in the larger blade working better than in the smaller blade.
For ripping with the smaller blade I would use an 18 tooth blade so the teeth were farther apart, but a 24 tooth worked well for cross cut.

As to your question about safety issues, I doubt that it’s any more dangerous than a regular 10” blade, unless you forget the circumference is smaller and do something silly.


-- Improvise.... Adapt...... Overcome!

View Eric's profile

Eric

216 posts in 1978 days


#14 posted 12-30-2011 02:48 AM

Dallas,

Can you explain the gullet idea to me? What I mean is I can’t imagine running a piece through a 40T blade so fast that the gullet fills completely with debris… even a 60T for that matter. Now if you’re talking a 200T plywood blade perhaps those gullets might fill. In the case of most carbide tipped blades. I would think the number of cutting teeth would have a much greater impact than the gullet. Obviously, the number of teeth and gullet determine each other, along with circumference. Is this simply a question of the chicken or the egg???

-- Eric

View Dallas's profile

Dallas

3599 posts in 1954 days


#15 posted 12-30-2011 02:56 AM

Eric, You would be amazed at how fast the gullet on a blade can fill up.

The majority of 10” ripping blades are 24-30 tooth, Combination blades into the 60 tooth area and cross cut blades are 40 tooth on up.

Someone else here can explain better than I can why this is, but suffice it to say that the more teeth on the blade, the more problems you’ll have doing rips because the gullets fill up.

-- Improvise.... Adapt...... Overcome!

showing 1 through 15 of 19 replies

Have your say...

You must be signed in to reply.

DISCLAIMER: Any posts on LJ are posted by individuals acting in their own right and do not necessarily reflect the views of LJ. LJ will not be held liable for the actions of any user.

Latest Projects | Latest Blog Entries | Latest Forum Topics

HomeRefurbers.com