# Craftsman King Seeley Cabinet Saw



## Hermando (Sep 28, 2010)

I am about to make the final deal on a vintage Craftsman King Seeley table saw 103.27270. I was wondering if anyone knew of the quality of this older model and if a restoration is worth the investment. I would upgrade the fence, but try to keep most of it original as my main project saw. Although this unit resembles a cabinet saw it does have the top mounted trunnion and the outboard motor.

I guess is it worth the restoration as a daily retro cabinet saw or keep dreaming of having a real one some day.

H.


----------



## Timbo (Aug 21, 2008)

Have you been to OWWM? Quite a few on there to look at. I have a 103.22160 8" saw, the Craftsman saws made back then are good and parts seem readily available on fleebay


----------



## Loren (May 30, 2008)

I think they are kind of like a junior Unisaw.

I think you'll find it works fine. Pros like 3hp and bigger motors
on a cabinet saw but that's really because it allows faster
cutting and ripping a lot of 8/4 hardwoods.


----------



## Hermando (Sep 28, 2010)

I did check out all the restored models on that site and that is what gave me the inspiration to look at this particular model. Just wondering if a 1950 model would be as good or better than something newer today in terms of hybrid/contractor table saws.


----------



## knotscott (Feb 27, 2009)

*"Just wondering if a 1950 model would be as good or better than something newer today in terms of hybrid/contractor table saws."*

They're a neat looking old saw. Parts like bearings and gears might be more durable, but the engineering technology probably isn't as advanced….fence and DC isn't as good, and there's also no riving knife. What's the motor size and overall weight of that saw? It sure is more novel than some of the entry level newer saws….with a fence update and possibly a beefier motor, it could work well.


----------



## Airspeed (Mar 11, 2013)

I had a King Seeley bench top table saw a while back, it was a really well built saw, had the original fence, miter and both cast iron open extensions. It was far superior to any modern bench top saws. I was using it when I had my unisaw set up for something else. I should have kept it but a guy offered me $150 for it, I paid $10 at a yard sale.


----------



## IrreverentJack (Aug 13, 2010)

This is a fine restoration by Derek Lee posted on VintageMachinery.org
















VintageMachinery.com (OWWM has a few restorations on site the manual. Sears called it a "Floor Model" saw. IMO it is a few steps up from a contractor saw but a few steps below an older Unisaw or other cabinet saw. I don't believe it will be worth as much as a Unisaw in similar condition if you decide to sell it, but it could be a fine saw to use. -Jack


----------



## condriver (Jan 10, 2018)

I have a 103.27270 model for about 40 years or more. It is my main go to saw for almost everything. I added a biesemeyer fence to it and it works great.


----------



## BillWhite (Jul 23, 2007)

Don't have the saw, but have a KS drill press that has lived well for all it's years. You can't beat the old KS stuff for the price.
Bill


----------



## wormil (Nov 19, 2011)

If it's anything like the King Seeley lathe I owned, it'll have been slapped together at the factory with little or no QC. My lathe was barely operable because of all the casting flash and it was 50 years old. I'm surprised it didn't go to the dump.


----------



## rwe2156 (May 7, 2014)

Beware anything "vintage Craftsman".........


----------



## dhazelton (Feb 11, 2012)

> Beware anything "vintage Craftsman".........
> 
> - rwe2156


Nonsense.


----------



## Holt (Mar 15, 2011)

Double probationary nonsense. With Craftsman stuff, the trick is to find out who really made the tool. It seems like most of the modern Craftsman table saws could be better, but that contractor saw made for them by Emerson was great tool.



> Beware anything "vintage Craftsman".........
> 
> - rwe2156
> 
> ...


----------



## Smitty_Cabinetshop (Mar 26, 2011)

BS on the blanket 'beware' statement. That kind of broad brush editorializing serves no purpose at all.


----------

