# Saw Stop Killer ?



## tierraverde (Dec 1, 2009)

Interesting.
Has anyone seen this? Looks like you can retrofit your existing table saw, or manufacturer's will pick up on it.
No blade damage, no cartridge replacement. When it senses tissue getting close, (no contact) it shuts down the blade in 1/8th of a second. The blade can be re-started immediately after shut down.
Wow.
This will give the lobbying attorney a run for his money. HA! I love when alternative competition to a monopoly are born.

http://thewoodwhisperer.com/a-sawstop-killer/


----------



## EPJartisan (Nov 4, 2009)

I find it all kinda disgusting… not that the addition of an injury preventing device is not wonderful, but I do not like the way this whole thing played out. In fact it scares the hell out of me how it played out. It's a complete abuse of our judicial system to push sales through lawsuits and an encouragement of big brother politics (and this from me.. a socialist) If anything I hope SawStop gets blasted out of the market. Go Go Whirlwind!!!


----------



## Stormin (Oct 6, 2010)

Thanks for the information The only other saw I have seen is the Saw Stop ( wiener saw ) which looks like it completely ruins the blade. Our politicians in Canada are no better than yours I can't believe half the stuff they get away with and then a very large pension afterward .
Thanks for posting Jim

Norm


----------



## ken_c (Sep 28, 2009)

I could have bought a Saw Stop for the same price I spent on my new unisaw but simply due to the crap surrounding the saw stop - when i say crap I mean lawyers and lobbyists - I opted for the uniisaw. Aside from the fact that the unisaw is a much superior tool manufactured completely in the USA with a US made marathon motor - not the Chinese made one in the saw stop, I can give you an earful on Chinese made motors like the one that is the the General International saw I had the the Unisaw replaced. - Don't believe them - you know, General International, when they claim that the 50-260 has a TEFC motor - IT IS NOT TEFC. If it was the motor bearings wouldn't have failed due to dust infiltration, I would expect the same from the sawstop.


----------



## GregD (Oct 24, 2009)

Encouraging development. Competition is good.


----------



## dbray45 (Oct 19, 2010)

The latest on the efforts of Mr. Gass - USA today article

http://www.usatoday.com/money/industries/manufacturing/2011-02-02-saws02_ST_N.htm?loc=interstitialskip

If you plan to get a new saw, the prices are going up. I have said my piece on this and will say nothing more.


----------



## Eric_S (Aug 26, 2009)

removed since your link included my link.


----------



## Toolz (Feb 26, 2008)

Amen to what GregD said. If this was available as an after market item I would buy it today.


----------



## lilredweldingrod (Nov 23, 2009)

I wonder if Gass is going to hire Oneida's lawyer to go after Whirlwind? Lawyers….Pffffft


----------



## Bertha (Jan 10, 2011)

I was unaware of the legal wranglings until reading this post. I had a neutral opinion of the SawStop until now. Now I wouldn't own one if my fingers depended on it.


----------



## TheDane (May 15, 2008)

I hope David Butler (developer of Whirlwind) is successful. This is an innovative technology that deserves a chance in the market. It will be interesting see which manufacturer embraces it first.

And, without knowing specifics of his design, I would hazard a guess that he'll be able to successfully defend any patent suits that may occur.

-Gerry


----------



## HorizontalMike (Jun 3, 2010)

With regards to the SawStop case:

In April 2004, Carlos Osorio took a job as a flooring installer for PT Hardwood Floor Service in Medford, Mass. According to the defendant's trial brief, Osorio had never used a tablesaw before, so his boss showed him how to use the tool and cautioned him about the dangers. A couple of weeks later while installing an oak floor, Osorio was ripping a 21/4-in.-wide floorboard on a Ryobi BTS 15 benchtop tablesaw. *The blade guard and splitter were removed and he was making the cut without a rip fence*. His left hand slipped into the spinning blade, nearly removing his pinky finger and severely cutting two other fingers and his thumb.

So what happens when someone uses the *SawStop BYPASS SWITCH* and cuts their finger(s) off?

Tell me how THAT is any different than the Osorio vs Ryobi (SawStop Case)?

An equivalent ruling of justice would say that SawStop would be liable for allowing users to "bypass" the safety features of the SawStop saw. And common sense says, "stupid operator."


----------



## tierraverde (Dec 1, 2009)

There's no way, with what politics/lobbying going on from the low-life ambulance chaser Gass, would I ever buy a Saw-Stop.
I don't condone laws or directives that only serve to enrich attorneys and municipalities.
Seat belt laws only serve to enrich cities, towns through fines and tickets. I don't need protection from myself. Saw-Stop protects the careless from themselves.
If people are not educated on the operation and safety issues of a tool/machine, people shouldn't be using them.
Power mowers are sold to anyone and there are countless injuries every year. How do you regulate these?
Lawyers and many stupid laws protecting stupid people need to stop.
But it's my wishful thinking in this litigious society.


----------



## crank49 (Apr 7, 2010)

First, let me say that you told it like it is, Mike. And I don't always agree with what you say.

There is no way the verdict in the Osorio/Ryobi case made any sense at all. Anybody with a milligram of brains would have to say that was a bogus decision. A man with virtually no experience, removes all the safety guards, works without even the fence, and admitted when the wood he was cutting was binding, he chose to push even harder until kickback threw the workpiece out of his grip and caused the injury. Maybe the employer was at fault for not training him properly or for not being sure the guards were used when they should be. But no, this idiot jury determined the design of the saw was at fault.

On the other hand, don't hold your breath waiting for "Whirlwind" to save the day. It only works with the guard in place. It detects the presence of anything on top of the wood you are cutting by proximity sensor. It stops the blade by using the motor as a brake, which takes several seconds to stop. It does not retract the blade. You can loose a hand in a table saw in milliseconds. In 3 seconds the blade in a table saw will make 180 revolutions. The surface of that blade will have will have traveled over 230 feet. A lot of fingers, hands, and arms could be cut by 230 feet of spinning blade. And, besides the fact that it is too slow to prevent injury when it is working, many cuts require the removal of the guard, and any little protection this system could offer is removed with it. So, if a mister Osorio was using a Whirlwind equiped saw, nothing changes. The saw would be at fault.

Oops, I stand corrected. I just now read that the Whirlwind now can stop a blade in 1/8 second. So, that means the fastest it can stop a spinning blade is 7.5 revolutions and that is equal to about a little over 9 feet of travel. I still don't think I want to drag my hand across 9 feet of blade, but I'll admit that's better than their old system.


----------



## ChrisForthofer (Jan 1, 2010)

No the operator would be at fault. Just like the sawstop bypass switch, the blade take a few tenths of a second to stop on the whirlwind, removing the splitter and blade guard, and not using the rip fence. All of those things are safety features/guards that a user can disable or choose not to use. It was a choice to not use those items in the ryobi case and NO technology eliminates the operators ability to bypass it. No accountability for your individual actions is what Gass is relying on to legislate himself into a higher tax bracket.


----------



## juniorjock (Feb 3, 2008)

Seat belt laws only serve to enrich cities, towns through fines and tickets.

Are you serious?


> ? I mean really…....... are you SERIOUS


?

- JJ


----------



## Brad_Nailor (Jul 26, 2007)

What idiot would use a table saw free hand with no fence? I think that was the first thing they taught us in shop class when we finally got enough experience to be able to use the table saw. This case screams tort reform. What judge would actually award damages in that case? The guy was a beginner, not given enough instruction, the machine had every safety feature defeated, and he was using it improperly, and forcing the wood into the blade even though it was binding? Ridiculous….This is like falling off a cliff and suing gravity. Of course this idiot was going to hurt himself, I'm surprised it took that long. Wheres the personal responsibility? I think the employer is more at fault, for not training and not supervising a beginner on such a dangerous piece of equipment?


----------



## Jack_T (Feb 6, 2010)

I certainly don't want the use of flesh sensing technology (FST) to be legislated. I do believe that people should take personal responsibility for their own safety. I believe that Congress should pass a law mandating personal responsibility regarding the use of the table saw.

Specifically, the law should prohibit anyone injured using a saw without FST manufactured after FST became available, in that class of saws, be prohibited from any insurance reimbursement for medical costs, lost wages or vocational retraining. This would include health insurance, workers compensation benefits, medicare benifits, disability benefits, unemployment benefits, welfare benefits and vocational benefits. I would also extend the bar to injuries that occur while FST has been turned off on saws equipped with it.

Simply put if you are not responsible enough to do everything possible to minimize the risk of injury then you should be soley responsible for the cost and consequences of those injuries if they occur.

It could be named the Freedom of Choice/Personal Responsibility Act and we could call it Four Fingered Frankie's Law for lobbying purposes.


----------



## dbray45 (Oct 19, 2010)

You know, this does open some doors. I slipped going down the stairs a few years ago and broke my ankle. I need to call my lawyer to find out what I can sue the developer that built my house for. Should be worth millions. The steps did not sense that I was falling and catch me. I can now take the railings off my stairs, the builder is responsible.

Come to think of it, when I was a kid, my sister closed a car door on my hand (window was up), very traumatic. It was a Ford. This should be worth a couple of million. The door should have automatically dropped the window, sensing my hand was there.


----------



## traupmann (Oct 8, 2010)

All this grousing sounds just like the seat belt laws, the air bag laws, the crash resistant bumpers law, an on and on. Come on. Safety is always the last item on the list to come into force, and is always found to be a great benefit to production, quality, and society in general. Yes it will cost more, yes there will still be some accidents, but we are now at the death toll on the highways equal to 1957. Let's put fingers and arms in the same place.


----------



## dbray45 (Oct 19, 2010)

No this is not the same.
I am not aware of any of the car manufacturers, etc… being sued directly because they did not have a safety device before any laws were passed. Most of these safety changes were originated from insurance companies, safety organizations, and the like in response to a lot of injuries from accidents over many years that were documented ad vausium. They were NOT directed from a single attorney together with a judge with an agenda armed with unvarified set of statistics. It is MORE than a coincidence that Gass was a part of it.

If the employee was trained correctly AND the current safety equipment was installed, the person would not have been hurt in the first place. Once you take off any safety equipment, the responsibility falls on the user regardless on what the safety equipment was. Brakes on a car is considered to be safety equipment, if you disable the brakes and you drive into somebody, is the manufacturer liable -NO. When the saw was made, it complied with current law and sold as such. This ruling sets the stage for every car manufacture to be sued if you have a 1968 muscle car, get into an accident, because it was not equiped with air bags - yes - they were in the design stages and may have ben in the testing stages at the time but it took many years to get them where they were safe.

The changes in the laws were difficult and several technologies were thouroghly tested long before laws were passed.


----------



## dbray45 (Oct 19, 2010)

I want to add something else that has yet to be stated. This was a commercial setting, to my understanding. Commercial and production environments are different from typical home use toys. Most of us use commercial equipment in many ways in order to complete a wide array of projects from personal to production and forget that these are not the normal household items - including legally.

In the course of commercial work, it is long understood that this setting has a multitude of dangers that do not exist in home environments. Same thing goes for kitchens, mills, machine shops, etc… even the banking industries. This includes a wide range of legalities that is covered under the term "commercial paper." It is an understood thing that a business owner, when they sign a contract, has read and understands what they are signing where a homeowner may not be liable even in signing the contract. When you are paid to do a job, you are from that moment a "professional" and as a result, payed to know what you are doing. If you are not trained, this is a liability for the employer. If safety equipment is not being used, this a liability for the employer unless the employer has documentation showing that the employee has been trained to use the equipment safely and by removing the safety devices the employee absolves the employer of liablility. This should have had nothing to do with the manufacturer, especially in a commercial setting - UNLESS there is a different agenda because it was under a commercial enironment.

If this equipment were bought in a Walmart for $100.00 and was sold with no safety equipment of any kind - then the issues are different. All of these toys are legally considered commercial equipment and fall into a different set of legal rules.

When I bought my Grizzly bandsaw and they asked if the delivery point was commercial or residential, they asked me a bunch of questions - because this is equipment is for commcial, industrial, or farm use - not normally in a townhouse.


----------



## teejk (Jan 19, 2011)

welcome to the nanny state. it is unfortunate that accidents happen in the shop but when it comes to the table saw, I have to guess that most are due to operator stupidity. #1 a well-tuned saw (I cut my teeth on the RAS as my primary tool due to lack of $$$ so I learned ALOT about the need to keep things aligned and there were many more adjustments to make on that one), #2 reasonably sharp blades (a common error I think for the occassional user…I have witnessed people ripping pine with smoke coming from the blade as they used their entire body weight to push the board through a cut) and #3 basic common sense (e.g. if the space between the fence and the blade is close to the width of a few fingers then use a push stick that is available for much less than the $69 SS module) would probably prevent most of them.

Unfortunately for the future of the craft, I have been reading that many schools are discontinuing shop classes due to legal liability concerns. for me that was a very good introduction to the hazards of power tools (in fact the beating one would get from my instructor for ignoring safety rules would be a toss-up with having a root-canal without anesthesia).


----------



## tierraverde (Dec 1, 2009)

*"Seat belt laws only serve to enrich cities, towns through fines and tickets.

Are you serious?? I mean really…….... are you SERIOUS?" 
- JJ*

JJ, Let me clear up what my intent was.
The key here is seat belt laws, not seat belt systems
I believe EVERYONE should wear a seatbelt. They definitely let folks walk away from what might have been a deadly event. But they also should have a choice to wear one, as if they don't, they are no danger to anyone else but themselves. We don't need mandatory laws to protect people from themselves, yet government sees an opportunity to increase revenues by mandating protection on what should be a personal choice.
I hope this clears up my last post.

To stay on subject matter, if I remove a blade guard, splitter, riving knife, or bypass any safety gadget, that's my choice to do so. I'm only jeopardizing my own limbs.
I'll bet 90% of everyone here has removed the cumbersome blade guard that came with the saw. It's their choice and that why manufacturers make it removable.


----------



## Jack_T (Feb 6, 2010)

David that simply is not what the state of the law is.


----------



## Loren (May 30, 2008)

It is fairly common on jobsites to see guys ripping tapers on a table saw
without a fence. Scares the heck of me, but it's a common method
tradesmen use.


----------



## tommyt654 (Dec 16, 2008)

Hey Algale, where did you get all your info from the Sawstop sight. Lawyers are lawyers and Gass volunteered to testify to promote his tool, Get with the program dude and some real facts.As far as Osario and his lawyers who now are posted as looking for tablesaw injurys on Sawstops website they are just what they are ambulance chasing bottom feeders lookin to make an easy buck. Obviously the jury in Mass. was made up of a bunch of morons who know nothing about the use of power tools.But the fact remains its a matter of time till someone else or another manufacturer comes out with something else in the ,meantime the safest tool is the one between your ears. If folks would learn how to use that there would be a lot less of these type of accidents. Gass and Sawslop will be gone in 10 yrs and folks will be wondering where to tie the rope on the boat anchor they have that used to be a tablesaw


----------



## juniorjock (Feb 3, 2008)

I appreciate the explanation, Jim. When I read that I asked myself…"say what"?. I knew it had to be something other than the way I was taking it. Thanks for setting me straight.
- JJ


----------



## Gator (May 2, 2008)

I bought my sawstop table saw because it is a great saw. It is in my mind one of the best table saws built today. I was torn between it and the unisaw, and went with the sawstop. It is dead nuts flat, straight and does everything I expect it to do, and more. To read day after day about how you would never buy this machine because of every excuse in the book is so tiring. Everyone wishes ill feelings toward the inventor, yet deep down wish they had come up with the idea. I do. They are a group of people trying to do what ever they can to make as much money as they can. Bill Gates does the same, yet 80% of you own his products.

I have read so many statements about how so many people hate this saw, yet not once has anyone had the stones to call it what it is.. a damn good saw. Regardless of all the political crap and drama that some people cant seem to live their life without… get over it. Do you actually believe that the government will legislate a piece of technology that has propriatary ownership..


> Cmon.. even you are not that nieve… are you…


I know I know.. it was not 100% built in the USA by Bill Smith.. well you know what.. neither was your computer, your cell phone, and probably 90 % of the things in your home.. 
I am sorry if it sounds like I take this personally.. but some people are just relentless… haters.. of everything they can get others to hate… I can just imagine they must be a real blast to hang out with.

I applaud every inventor that comes out with new technology or inventions no matter what it is. If for some reason I was ever in a position to buy a second table saw for my shop.. it would also be a sawstop.. because it is a damn good saw.. oh.. and did I mention.. it is a damn good saw !!


----------



## ChuckM (May 12, 2008)

Algale - You've put across your views and answers well - with good logic, reasoning, and, above all, civility. We all are woodworkers and that's why we're here. We can freely express our likes and dislikes but we shouldn't do so at the expense of the reputation of others or without the support of facts. Let's show that woodworkers are not aggressors.

By the way, we live in the western world, everyone including Gass must be presumed innocent unless proven guilty. Anyone who wants to throw mud at the SAWSTOP tablesaw at the technology, by all means…but not at the inventor, just because of his profession or rising wealth. Those who have been buying his tablesaws (they're made in Taiwan and NOT in China) are the willing group and have not been forced to do so. He is entitled to make a lot of money (if he does, I don't know) as are any other successful people.

Interestingly, every time the sawstop topic is raised, someone would raise the issue of something that is made or is not made in China. If China bankrupted, who was going to buy up the debts in North America and Europe? In this 21st c and global economy, like it or not, we have to live together. As far as I am concerned, I buy from Canadian or American companies and help them financially and I don't care about the origins of their goods - if I did, I probably would live a life as if I were in the stone age (exagg.)


----------



## Jack_T (Feb 6, 2010)

Delta Power Equipment Corp. announced that its deal to purchase the Delta brand of woodworking equipment and machinery from Stanley Black & Decker closed Feb. 4 as expected.

*Delta Power Equipment is now a wholly-owned subsidiary of Chang Type Industrial Co. Ltd., a Taiwan-based manufacturing company*.

"We are right on track with our transition plan and expect to begin moving machinery and equipment from the Jackson, Tenn., location very soon," said Bryan Whiffen, Delta's president and CEO, in a press release.

One less reason to not buy a Saw Stop. The Unisaw will now be made by a Taiwanese Company. Sad really.


----------



## ChrisForthofer (Jan 1, 2010)

Where are saw stop saws manufactured?

SawStop table saws are designed in the U.S. and manufactured in Taiwan. SawStop employs three engineers who work at the facility in Taiwan to ensure that production standards and quality requirements are met. In addition, the manufacturing plant is ISO 9001 certified.

Read more: Where are sawstop table saws made? | Answerbag http://www.answerbag.com/q_view/2275149#ixzz1Dc6G0heh

Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, its the state of manufacturing today.


----------



## dbray45 (Oct 19, 2010)

Algale - I like your answer and your rationale may be correct BUT the fact remains - litigating a company on the basis of "what if" is not a good path to go down.

Where it comes to litigations of this type, saying that judge and prosecuting attorneys did not have an agenda, I am not on board with. May not be able to prove it nor do I care to, but to not dismiss a case against a company that built a piece of equipment that met all of the safety guidelines and laws of that state and or federal law at the time that it was made, sets the stage to any and all manufacturers that they are liable for not having safety equipment after the specific piece of equipment has left its doors.

The reason that I am so touchy about this and I don't think a lot of people are seeing - I will illustrate-

As some of you state, you would buy a StopSaw if you could afford it - and some of you have.

What do LJs do? We make things - we make tables, chairs, furniture, and really cool things that take a lot more imagination than I have. What this litigation does is that it opens the doors for people and companies to be sued on the basis of using safety equipment or features that are not available, ready for market, cost prohibitive, AND are not required to be there when the item is made and sold. You say, "this doesn"t apply to me!" Ever make a bunk bed? What if a kid falls out of the bed that you made becuase he is using it like a trampoline after the kid takes the rails off and some engineer/patent attorney comes back and says, "If the manufacturer had used my gizmo, this wouldn't have happened." You may be liable and you may go broke trying to defend against it. This is "legally" what this case does and as a result, creates the marketing that the engineer is looking to get-YES, this is an agenda in my book.

I may stand alone on my feelings but these are my feelings. Time will tell if I am right or not and God knows, I really hope I am wrong.

Oh, and the premise that cases with juries are not used as a precedence - You may want to take a look at the Scopes trial with Clarence Darrow. This was a jury trial and it has been cited more times than I can count and still is cited as a precedence. Every trial of record establishes precedence and every attorney and judge know it - for the good and bad.


----------



## tierraverde (Dec 1, 2009)

David in Damascus,

Amen brother.


----------



## crank49 (Apr 7, 2010)

Well, in the Osorio case, not only were the judge and jury stupid, but so were the dim-wits that wrote the laws. In fact I can't think of a single "consumer protection law" that serves any purpose other than to enrich a bunch of scumbag lawyers. Just my honest opinion. Thank you. If there are any lawyers out ther who are LJs please accept my apologies, and go buy yourself a SawStop, you can afford it.


----------



## dbray45 (Oct 19, 2010)

There are some laws that serve a positive purpose. I am enriched by the warning notices on ladders that tell me I could fall off if I use the top two steps or rungs. Maybe it is just me but I also get a warm and fuzzy reading the warning notice on my pnuematic nail gun stating that this device could nail me to the wall "and could cause serious injury." I think my bandsaw has a warning that this device could cause serious injury and has a drawing of fingers falling off a hand. I didn't know any of things before I saw these messages.

I wonder, does the Sawstop have these warnings - after all, with the sensing devices, this should not happen - unless the feature is disabled. I also wonder, if the customer disables the sensing device on the SawStop and cuts off a finger while cutting lumber, can they be sued as in Ryobi's case where the employee removed the fence and blade guard?


----------



## ChrisForthofer (Jan 1, 2010)

Probably have to sign your rights away when you buy one or there is some fine print you are bound by that prevents you from suing for injures if you buy Gass's solution to a nonexistant problem. My biggest concern is that his "invention" prevents dawinism from occuring. How else are we to chlorinate the gene pool?


----------



## Stormin (Oct 6, 2010)

Actually Chris anybody who cuts a board free hand on a table should have there gene pool chlorinated and then drained LOL


----------



## tierraverde (Dec 1, 2009)

algate…..................HUH!
What don't I understand about your post, and what's "evolution taught in public schools" have to do with common sense….....or this forum ?
Excuse me, but can you explain where you're coming from, or is this a play on demeaning us "woodworking dumb folk".


----------



## Jack_T (Feb 6, 2010)

Jim Algate is responding specifically to the issues raised in post #35 by Daviid Dbray45 who cited the Stokes case first. Al is correct on the facts and the law.


----------



## tommyt654 (Dec 16, 2008)

Hey Jack T ,Wrong facts bud. They will be owned by a Taiwanese company but the manufacturing will still be in the USA in South Carolina where they are retooling a plant there to continue manufacturing 1 of the only 2 tablesaws manufactured in the USA. Chris you are correct as a lawyer Gass made dang dure you could not hold him responsible for injurys when his saw fails. Its in the buyers agreement to covers him when it fails and it will fail eventually as I stated before its based on computers and electronics, kinda like anything else with those components its gonna fail sooner or later. In the meantime it still will not cut a hotdog,wet or damp wood any type of metal or anything that might cause an electric static charge like plastic and will even go off with a power surge. For $200+ dollars everytime that happens I can have a UNISAW manufactured here and used properly get the same results with it or any other saw without the headache of worrying about it going off prematurely or for a dumb reason like a staple embedded in a piece of lumber.The best boat anchor money can buy in a few more yrs


----------



## Jack_T (Feb 6, 2010)

Glad to hear they are only moving its production from Georgia to South Carolina. Now for the bad news:

It turns out that Stanley Black & Decker will be selling the Delta brand to a Taiwanese company called TOTY and it will be renamed Delta Power Equipment. TOTY makes many of the tools already sold by Stanley Black & Decker, Craftsman, and Ryobi.

I hope TOTY doesn't impose its quality control standards on the Unisaw. That would be a shame because Unisaw is a great Saw.


----------



## Resurrected (Jan 11, 2011)

Non-equipement damaging and no cut at all. Yeap I like it. Hmm by the looks of it saw stop is obsolete technology now. I look forward to seeing more from whirlwind. I hope all the major companys go with this type of technology over SAW STOP.

On another note Saw stop and Gass just shot themselves in the foot over the years, pushing their technology and allowing themselves to be even named in the law suit. This placed a sour taste in many of the customers mouths that they were seeking to get. Along with pissing off the big tool companies which likely will seek alternative options over saw stop technology.

One more note.
The world would be a better place without lawyers like Gass, and along with that people who think they have the right to tell others what is best for them. Old saying, but good saying when I was growing up was Mind your own business son. Mr. Gass and lawyers like him should not be aloud to practice. Mr gass although beginning as a patent lawyer still became a chaser. Greed corrupts.


----------



## dbray45 (Oct 19, 2010)

Ahhh - but without people like Gass, we could not have a discussion like this - good or bad.

Something I learned a long time ago, truth is gone fairly quickly, the perception takes over and how it is spun. Just like this conversation, what the original design of what Gass was looking to do is totally irrelevant - it is lost, or maybe not, who knows. Laws and their lawsuits are not about right or wrong, they are about interpretation of the law - by design. Each judge and jury will interpret what was done and decide whether the law was broken or not.

What facts that are disseminated, are so generic that any 10 people can have 30 ideas of what is going on, what is meant, what they see. There are two facts that remain, some will buy a SawStop. some will not. Just because Gass puts a disclaimer in the purchase documentation or even a contract, could, under the right situations still be sued. If nothing else, just becuase of his disclaimer - I haven't seen it nor do I care to. If the laws change because of his pushing his technology, the laws could nullify his exclusion. It could be another one of those, "becareful what you ask for situations."

Time will tell - in the meantime, we are free to discuss our feelings about it and scare the begeebers out of everyone that reads these posts. Its all good.


----------



## tierraverde (Dec 1, 2009)

I'm sure the whirlwind, being in the prototype stages, has a long way to go in having a system that is not cumbersome, awkward, and easily adjusts and sets up. (How many of us remove the blade guard because it's in the way) Then there's getting it to a manufacturing cost to make it attractive to the machine tool builders.
If and when these hurdles are realized, think of the machines it could be adapted to by the manufacturers.
Obviously the table saw, then bandsaws, router tables, planers, jointers, shapers etc., etc.
I don't think there is a chance of after market retrofits for currently sold machinery that ever would be available. Just to many variations.
It's one thing to sense an extremity, but another highly complex system to stop a cutter in 1/8th of a second. There are too many variations of machines to make it practical.


----------



## tierraverde (Dec 1, 2009)

Great discussion here. I'm glad I brought up the subject. It is refreshing to watch this post go on as long as it has without the flamers jumping aboard. It looks like the powers that be have suspended their accounts and I blocked one that would have eventually snuck in here and started a fire.
Thanks to all.


----------



## DrDirt (Feb 26, 2008)

Competition is good.
Not sure how effective this invention will really be though. Fundamentally it is not so different than other blade guards. This thing stops the blade if you get your finger *under *the guard.

OK

How many accidents really come from saws that have their guards in place? Certainly not the Ryobi case. While there are bypass functions on the sawstop, those are really driven by needing to cut wet wood etc. Sawstop mechanism still works with dado sets, and tennon jigs.
Seems if you stand your wood and cut beveled panels for cabinets, or use a tenon jig - the safety has to be removed from the whirlwind design.

I like the competition, but so many accidents seem to be from removing guards, a new blade guard isn't going to help.  It is very very unusual to get an accident by running your hand UNDER the guards (no mater who made them). I run without the guards often. I always have the splitter in place (micro-jig) unless cutting dados or angles, but that clear plastic overblade guard….long gone!

just my .02 on the new invention.


----------



## dbray45 (Oct 19, 2010)

Something will turn up, always does.


----------



## Knothead62 (Apr 17, 2010)

Re: seat belts. Having survived major wrecks, I don't leave the driveway without it. I wouldn't be here if it wasn't for seat belts.


----------



## rogerw (Jan 14, 2011)

i have to wonder who they got to be the ginnypig to try this out.


----------



## Resurrected (Jan 11, 2011)

Knot: You just have to tell me its bad and I will try to change, if you push it on me then I push back. Many people are like this. Saw stop, Yea its great technology and yes I want to keep me fingers and thumb but when you push it on me then I will stick with the *right of choice*. ( *Freedom* it is called) Cigarettes are bad for me, Alcohol is bad for me, Here lately eating is bad for me, Heck when are they going to say breathing is bad for me and regulate that to. ( Funny note Living is known to the state of California to cause cancer)

Ah as far as the whirlwind guard, I wonder if you could take what they have and build it around the table insert so you can not remove it. Yes any safety feature that can be disabled is not any good. I would probably keep the *saw stop* safety feature off because I would not want my saw damaged. Kinda dumb thinking though. Hmm saw damage finger damage LOL. (RIGHT OF CHOICE) I'd worry about the wet piece of wood that I thought was dry costing me dollars.


----------



## tommyt654 (Dec 16, 2008)

Interesting article here,Please make sure you read the others concerning where some folks exploit the mathmatics to come up with statistics concerning injuries to folks using tablesaws, http://blogs.popularwoodworking.com/editorsblog/


----------



## polyhedron (Aug 11, 2010)

I love it that somone is really pushing to get a new product out there like the SawStop. I don't think Mr. Butler will be able to get this through though because of all the different permutations of patents that SawStop has. It's pretty locked down.

One of the patents is "detects an operator in a dangerous position". That covers an awful lot …

Mr. Butler will soon have to determine if a legal battle is worth it to try to revoke some of the SawStop patents.


----------



## dbray45 (Oct 19, 2010)

Patents are very specific. If you could generalize that much, computers would not have evolved, neither would cars, telephones, radios, televisions, etc…. Another thing about patents, getting one is fairly simple, enforcing it is an entirely different matter. Funny thing about electronics as well as everything else, it is possible to accomplish similar things in countless ways, how many different hand saws are there with different arrays of teeth? Everyone of them have their own patents. Did I mention that patents expire after 20 years?

Paperclips and mousetraps also come to mind.


----------

