Forrest WoodWorker II or Freud Premier Fusion?

  • Advertise with us

« back to Power Tools, Hardware and Accessories forum

Forum topic by DavidNJ posted 01-03-2013 07:08 AM 9491 views 0 times favorited 12 replies Add to Favorites Watch
View DavidNJ's profile


389 posts in 2015 days

01-03-2013 07:08 AM

Yesterday I asked a question about ripping blades. . The answer, a least in part, is that the aggressive ATB/large hook blades from Forrest (ATB angle 15°, hook angle 20°) and Freud (ATB angle 30°, hook angle 18°) are better than the TCG ripping blades or other combination blades.

The question is which blade? The Forrest WoodWorker II has many adherents here. Although frightfully expensive it is the go to blade for many. The specs on Freud look as good or better.

I’ve found two meaningful reviews in Lumberjocks, both seem favorable to the Freud Premier Fusion:

Have you tried both blades? If so, how would you evaluate their differences? Which is better?



12 replies so far

View knotscott's profile


8055 posts in 3397 days

#1 posted 01-03-2013 11:09 AM

In a nutshell, it depends on what the cutting objective is. None is better in every aspect. For every design parameter there are advantages and disadvantages. The Fusion (and very similar Infinity Super General) are the cleanest cutting of any of the current 40T blades I’m aware of, and excel at clean crosscuts and plywood, plus leave a very highly polished edge on rip cuts up to ~ 1-1/2”. The 40T WWII rips a bit more efficiently in thicker materials, and should get a little better edge life.

Since the introduction of the Super General and Fusion, Forrest has introduced a 48T version of the WWII to compete head to head with these two blades, and it offeres similar strengths and weaknesses. Forrest also makes a 30T WWII that rips very efficiently, and crosscuts reasonably well. These are all capable of a glue ready edge directly from the saw.

-- Happiness is like wetting your pants...everyone can see it, but only you can feel the warmth....

View lumberjoe's profile


2899 posts in 2270 days

#2 posted 01-03-2013 02:46 PM

I am in the minority here and am actually not a fan of either one of these blades. Also I am not really a fan of general purpose blades. I am one of those guys who puts his arbor wrenches to work regularly. I have an Infinity combo blade I use for “in between” type stuff (trimming pen blanks, cutting stock for shop fixtures, etc) but when working on a decent sized project I rip with a 24 tooth rip blade and cross cut with an 80 tooth cross cut blade.

I didn’t like the fusion at all. Lots of burning for me, and the effort required for ripping was a little more than I like (needed a slower feed rate compared to the WWII). The Woodworker II was OK, but it just didn’t fit my style of woodworking, and it’s too pricey to just leave in the blade cabinet.


View DavidNJ's profile


389 posts in 2015 days

#3 posted 01-03-2013 02:50 PM

Is the Super General Infinity better than the Premier Fusion? Watching the video, reading the Scott’s reviews (, and the Wood Magazine test would seem very similar to the Premier Fusion.

There are two significant differences: The center is ground to true the blade and hook is slightly steeper at the same 20° of the Forrest WWII, compared to the Fusion’s 18°. Price is slightly higher (

Should the Super General blades be considered preferable to the Freud”s? Should these blades be used with a stabilizer or stiffener?

View Matt Przybylski's profile

Matt Przybylski

546 posts in 2400 days

#4 posted 01-03-2013 04:03 PM

I’m with lumberjoe on this one. I have the WWII and while its a fine blade I don’t use it much anymore. When I tried to rip maple I burned it really badly and bought a Freud 24Tnheavy duty rip blade that I now use for all ripping. My cross cuts are done on either an 80T Freud or 80T Irwin Marples, both of which give great smooth cuts.

-- Matt, Arizona,

View HillbillyShooter's profile


5811 posts in 2314 days

#5 posted 01-03-2013 04:21 PM

My vote is with lumberjoe also. I agree with and have the same philosophy (if not the exact same blade choices) as Matt. Also, it is my understanding (or I read somewhere) that the higher the ATB tooth angle, the quicker the tooth wear (the sooner the blade becomes dull). Everything has it’s trade off, and the all purpose blade is the jack of all trades, master of none in my opinion. Most of my blades are old Systematic (no longer available) with supplemental and additional blades by Forrest. My current crosscut blade is an old Freud 80-tooth Ultimate Crosscut blade that is so old it is black Teflon coated, although I do have and can use a 80-tooth Forrest Duraline Hi-A/T. I know there are a lot of LJs who feel the Forrest is overpriced, but I like the plate and the way it is straighten the best.

-- John C. -- "Firearms are second only to the Constitution in importance; they are the peoples' liberty's teeth." George Washington

View lj61673's profile


261 posts in 2421 days

#6 posted 01-03-2013 04:42 PM

The Freud Fusion and Infinity Super General are hands down the two best combination blades available. Can’t go wrong with either one. The Forrest is overrated and overhyped in my opinion…

View DavidNJ's profile


389 posts in 2015 days

#7 posted 01-03-2013 04:48 PM

Video on Forrest WWII 48T. ATB is 25°, hook 20°. The Duraline Hi-AT is 40°ATB, 5° hook, add comes in 80T and 100T (thin kerf only) versions. The Woodworker I is 20° ATB, 5° hook, 60T, thin kerf only. The Freud Ultimate Cutoff is 20° ATB, 10° hook, 80T

Is the higher tooth count ATB blades always going to have a cross cut advantage? In the Woodworker II 48T video above, Forrest recommends raising the blade height for ripping so fewer teeth are engaged and lowering it for crosscutting. It seems they are trying to tune their blade for different cuts with the blade height.

When I started the earlier thread, I thought the 24T ripping blade was for thicker materials, the 30T (10° ATB, 13° hook) for thinner materials. That thread said the 40T hi-ATB blades were better for ripping stock under 1”. Is that still true? Or is ripping all stock with the 24T flat blades preferred?

Are the hi-ATB, high tooth count blades better for cross cutting thin stock or just plywoods and veneers?



View lumberjoe's profile


2899 posts in 2270 days

#8 posted 01-03-2013 07:37 PM

Given I have an underpowered saw (R4512) I stick with thin kerf blades. I get glue line quality rips with a 24 tooth blade. The only 24 tooth blade that I felt was unacceptable for glue ups without some planing/jointing was the Diablo. I’d rather not switch blades when going from 4/4 to 6/4+ – especially when I get really nice cuts from my 24 tooth blades. My first choice is the Infinity 010-124 (thin kerf 24 tooth, 20 degree rake, FTG). This blade is a bargain at under 50$. A VERY close second is actually the Irwin Marples 24 tooth rip blade. I love that one as well.

I either use the Freud LU74R010, or the Marples 80T for cross cutting. Both are awesome and which one I use is only determined by which one was cleaned most recently. I got an amazing deal on the Freud 60 tooth LU88R010, but I haven’t had a chance to really use it yet.

For large rips in laminated plywood that I want a nice finish on, I use my 50 tooth Infinity 010-150 combo max. I also use this blade for casual stuff like I mentioned before (trimming quick pieces for jigs/shop stuff, trimming pen blanks down to size, etc)


View DavidNJ's profile


389 posts in 2015 days

#9 posted 01-04-2013 07:55 AM

This started because I read the Freud catalog. They specified their 24T Flatfor over 3/4” and their 30T TCG for thinner rips. The first thread indicated the 40T hi-ATB blades were better than the 30T ATB blades and could be used instead of the 24T blades.

There seems to be some agreement on an 80T ATB blade for cross cuts and a 80T Hi-ATB for veneers and fine cuts.

This thread goes back to the original conjecture, the 24T Flat is a primary ripping blade. But what about thin rips? Is the 40T Hi-ATB blade the best way to go?

Infinity also has a 40T 1/16” kerf blade with built-in stabilizer. Is that a useful blade?

View lumberjoe's profile


2899 posts in 2270 days

#10 posted 01-04-2013 02:18 PM

It seems kind of gimmicky to me, and stabilizers limit depth of cut. I make a lot of thin rips with a ripping blade and they come out ok. If you look at the trivet I made, all the walnut is 1/8” thick and cut with the Infinity 010-124. When making thin rips, I use a jig and keep the off cut, but I’m not sure that makes a lot of difference.

If you are talking about rips into thin stock, I use a combo or cross cut blade. Generally, thin stock I work with will either be veneered plywood or laminate anyway.

you can drive yourself crazy deciding on a blade. I am kind of a table saw blade addict. The value of the blades I own currently exceeds the value of my table saw itself. I have sold off some of the blades (like the two mentioned in the headline of this thread), and have found quite a few that work well with my saw and the way I process materials. My advice would be to give something a shot. You really can’t go wrong with any of the blades mentioned in this thread.


View MedicKen's profile


1615 posts in 3484 days

#11 posted 01-04-2013 02:35 PM

I have had both blades. When I had my unisaw, 2hp 3ph, I tried both. I picked up the WWII from one of the online suppliers and installed it. While it cut ok with a standard throat plate I did get a fair amount of tear out. The blade has to have a ZCI in order to cut well. I was able to find the Freud blade on ebay and only paid $59 for it. I also tried it with both the standard throat plate and a ZCI. The Freud would cut circles around the WWII. Much cleaner cuts in both hard and soft woods. I eventually sold the saw and all the blades. But, I did keep the Freud and wound up giving it to a friend who has a woodworking school. He has now gone to the blade as well.

-- My job is to give my kids things to discuss with their

View Woodbum's profile


813 posts in 3087 days

#12 posted 01-04-2013 06:38 PM

For a combination blade, My opinion is that the Forrest WWII is the finest blade I have ever used. For heavy, and continuous ripping however, you still should bite the bullet and install a dedicated rip blade, especially in hard woods like maple, ash and some oaks. Forrest makes a dedicated rip blade that I plan on investing in to go with my WWII blades and 8” dado king. Freud’s glue line rip blade is pretty damned good too and I will use the one I have until it is dull.

-- "Now I'm just another old guy wearing funny clothes"

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