7 ms·

SawStop tried this with table saws. Put such a bad taste in my mouth that I will never buy one.

bsder 5y ago
Are you sure that isn't saw manufacturer propaganda? I thought the issue with SawStop wasn't that the licensing was bad but that nobody was willing to take on the liability. ie. If someone cut off their hand with a table saw, it was settled law that it was their own fault. If someone cut off their hand and the SawStop didn't fire, the manufacturer now had a gigantic liability.
- frosted-flakes 5y ago
  SawStop is or was trying to get the government to ban the sale of saws without flesh detection technology. Guess who holds the patents for said technology? Bosch came out with a superior design that doesn't use a brake at all, but were barred from selling it in the US because it infringed SawStop's patents.
  - bsder 5y ago
    > SawStop is or was trying to get the government to ban the sale of saws without flesh detection technology. Yeah, that's bad. When you resort to lobbying, you're no longer on the good side of the ledger.
    - slownews45 5y ago
      Tell that to the kids whose hands are saved. https://www.swnewsmedia.com/shakopee_valley_news/news/education/these-saws-are-saving-one-finger-at-a-time-at-shakopee-west-middle-school/article_dc03d99b-e265-50b3-82e5-58aefa9398b5.html https://www.swnewsmedia.com/shakopee_valley_news/news/educat...
      - bsder 5y ago
        We have a SawStop in our space for exactly that reason. However, I don't find forcing everyone to have it by law to be particularly palatable. I will tell you, however, that it goes off about once a month like clockwork and, as far as I can tell, it hasn't yet fired because someone was about to get injured (this is a good thing--it means our people aren't being stupid). It's a $100-$200 hit every single time it fires. So, we have an ongoing expense of about $1500 every year for SawStop. That's a new saw every year. Should that really be forced on people?
        LgWoodenBadger 5y ago
        If it’s happening that frequently, and it’s not due to contact with flesh, then you’re cutting material that you shouldn’t be, or you should be disabling the protection feature.
        bsder 5y ago
        > you’re cutting material that you shouldn’t be, or you should be disabling the protection feature. I will absolutely fight you on this tooth and nail. 1) I don't want anyone to get into the habit of turning off safety features. Ever. 2) If the material can be cut on that saw without the SawStop, it should be able to be cut with the SawStop. If it can't, the fault is with SawStop, not the user. I'm happy to pay the extra money for the extra safety. However, I will NOT allow you to blame the user for the fact that SawStop has not uncommon failure modes.
        whoknowswhat11 5y ago
        Uhh - the manual will tell you not to cut aluminum, very wet wood etc with sawstop feature on. If you turn off feature you are back to your regular saw - hopefully you use a stick etc in all cases because as you note replacing cartridges is expensive. One thing I like, it'll put feature back on automatically for the next time machine gets turned on.
        5y ago
    - Bud 5y ago
      Lobbying is simply the practice of petitioning the government to adopt a given policy. That's a foundation of democracy, really: the right to petition the government. I think you might want to re-examine your view a bit.
      - phkahler 5y ago
        >> Lobbying is simply the practice of petitioning the government to adopt a given policy. Adopting a policy is different from having them mandate what people buy. Hey, have people buy epipens and keep one at the school for each kid with allergies. Then later we will raise our prices 1000 percent. That's not influencing policy, its fucking people all the way to the bank - with government assistance.
      - specialist 5y ago
        I've done some unpaid policy work. Defending democracy by advocating election integrity. No one is writing books about my mendacious activities. FANG has a phalanx of former electeds and staffers paid to hustle their former colleagues. To defend their grift and dismantle civil society. Grist for an endless torrent of outrage porn. While pendants will argue both me and FANG are "lobbying", petitioning our governments, our respective efforts hardly seem comparable.
  - slownews45 5y ago
    This is actually totally false. Sawstop dropped blade below table. Bosch also dropped blade below table. So the invention was very fast acting sensing and then dropping blade. Sawstop added brake. Sawstop ALSO did a brake. The brake made a pretty reasonable difference in terms of damage. Plenty of youtube videos exposing this saw. "SawStop uses a different mechanism to drop the blade, but also employs an aluminum brake. In our testing on both top and front strikes, the blade stopped with less damage to my hand than Bosch’s Reaxx." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B3JsUGwt_Mg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B3JsUGwt_Mg
    - frosted-flakes 5y ago
      What is false? Did not Sawstop sue Bosch for patent infringement?
      - whoknowswhat11 5y ago
        "Bosch came out with a superior design that doesn't use a brake at all, but were barred from selling it in the US because it infringed SawStop's patents." The design was not superior and the infringement was not based on a brake or lack of one. The infringement was because of copy of the skin contact sensing / blade drop technology as what were called underlying elements. I think the case may still be ongoing though? This one went a long while.
        frosted-flakes 5y ago
        I never said that the infringement was related to the brake. I thought I was pretty clear that the patents were about skin-sensing technology. And "not superior" is subjective. If the SawStop tech has enough false triggers and destroys as many blades as it apparently does based on what I've read (probably depends on material being cut), the increased cost almost certainly isn't worth it unless you're a high school shop class.
        foerbert 5y ago
        I don't think that was clear. You mentioned the Bosch system had a patent issue and immediately mentioned it didn't even use a break. While it's possible to read that as the Bosch system being superior because it lacks a break, the main topic was the patent issue, so it's more natural to read it as being related to that. Meanwhile there wasn't even a mention of the sensing technology.
slownews45 5y ago
The sawstop story is interesting. They basically tried to license it to the other saw companies. The other companies said hell no. We have the market. So sawstop started building their own (great) saws. They really are pretty to very high quality. The saw stop feature is also very effective. It's so effective that if you are running a woodworking shop in a school, or ever want to let your kids use your saw, or have staff using your saw, you really owe it to them to ALWAYS buy a sawstop. I've worked with a few owners who took the approach you did. Inevitably someone loses a finger - and after the dust settles and folks ask why they didn't put this VERY simple and not that expense solution in place - they usually regret it. Either they feel guilty for chisling on some $ and having someone lose function in their hand or if they are here in CA they pay out BIG TIME for their stupidity.
- slownews45 5y ago
  A series of meetings followed, in which Gass "negotiated with major players such as Ryobi, Delta, Black & Decker, Emerson, and Craftsman" in an attempt to license his invention; he followed those negotiations with a February 2001 presentation to the Defense Research Industry, a trade group for attorneys representing the power-tool industry.[7] That presentation immediately preceded one from Dan Lanier, Black & Decker's national coordinating counsel; Lanier's presentation gave Gass the impression he was unlikely to succeed in convincing major power tool manufacturers to license SawStop technology.[7] The license fee was going to be around 3% of wholesale (so about $3 on a $100 wholesale saw that goes for $200 retail). I think he came very close to licensing to ryobi? Anyways, if you think $3 for potentially incredibly QOL saving tech is too much for an inventor that actually invented something (and tested on his own finger) then I don't know what to tell you. That said, once someone's parents (if you run a woodshop in a school) or employee sues you - you may start valuing this invention a bit more.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - WalterBright 5y ago
    On the other hand (!), maybe the onus for the lost fingers is on SawStop for demanding those licensing fees.

Are you sure that isn't saw manufacturer propaganda? I thought the issue with SawStop wasn't that the licensing was bad but that nobody was willing to take on the liability. ie. If someone cut off their hand with a table saw, it was settled law that it was their own fault. If someone cut off their hand and the SawStop didn't fire, the manufacturer now had a gigantic liability.

frosted-flakes 5y ago
SawStop is or was trying to get the government to ban the sale of saws without flesh detection technology. Guess who holds the patents for said technology? Bosch came out with a superior design that doesn't use a brake at all, but were barred from selling it in the US because it infringed SawStop's patents.
- bsder 5y ago
  > SawStop is or was trying to get the government to ban the sale of saws without flesh detection technology. Yeah, that's bad. When you resort to lobbying, you're no longer on the good side of the ledger.
  - slownews45 5y ago
    Tell that to the kids whose hands are saved. https://www.swnewsmedia.com/shakopee_valley_news/news/education/these-saws-are-saving-one-finger-at-a-time-at-shakopee-west-middle-school/article_dc03d99b-e265-50b3-82e5-58aefa9398b5.html https://www.swnewsmedia.com/shakopee_valley_news/news/educat...
    - bsder 5y ago
      We have a SawStop in our space for exactly that reason. However, I don't find forcing everyone to have it by law to be particularly palatable. I will tell you, however, that it goes off about once a month like clockwork and, as far as I can tell, it hasn't yet fired because someone was about to get injured (this is a good thing--it means our people aren't being stupid). It's a $100-$200 hit every single time it fires. So, we have an ongoing expense of about $1500 every year for SawStop. That's a new saw every year. Should that really be forced on people?
      - LgWoodenBadger 5y ago
        If it’s happening that frequently, and it’s not due to contact with flesh, then you’re cutting material that you shouldn’t be, or you should be disabling the protection feature.
        bsder 5y ago
        > you’re cutting material that you shouldn’t be, or you should be disabling the protection feature. I will absolutely fight you on this tooth and nail. 1) I don't want anyone to get into the habit of turning off safety features. Ever. 2) If the material can be cut on that saw without the SawStop, it should be able to be cut with the SawStop. If it can't, the fault is with SawStop, not the user. I'm happy to pay the extra money for the extra safety. However, I will NOT allow you to blame the user for the fact that SawStop has not uncommon failure modes.
        whoknowswhat11 5y ago
        Uhh - the manual will tell you not to cut aluminum, very wet wood etc with sawstop feature on. If you turn off feature you are back to your regular saw - hopefully you use a stick etc in all cases because as you note replacing cartridges is expensive. One thing I like, it'll put feature back on automatically for the next time machine gets turned on.
        5y ago
  - Bud 5y ago
    Lobbying is simply the practice of petitioning the government to adopt a given policy. That's a foundation of democracy, really: the right to petition the government. I think you might want to re-examine your view a bit.
    - phkahler 5y ago
      >> Lobbying is simply the practice of petitioning the government to adopt a given policy. Adopting a policy is different from having them mandate what people buy. Hey, have people buy epipens and keep one at the school for each kid with allergies. Then later we will raise our prices 1000 percent. That's not influencing policy, its fucking people all the way to the bank - with government assistance.
    - specialist 5y ago
      I've done some unpaid policy work. Defending democracy by advocating election integrity. No one is writing books about my mendacious activities. FANG has a phalanx of former electeds and staffers paid to hustle their former colleagues. To defend their grift and dismantle civil society. Grist for an endless torrent of outrage porn. While pendants will argue both me and FANG are "lobbying", petitioning our governments, our respective efforts hardly seem comparable.
- slownews45 5y ago
  This is actually totally false. Sawstop dropped blade below table. Bosch also dropped blade below table. So the invention was very fast acting sensing and then dropping blade. Sawstop added brake. Sawstop ALSO did a brake. The brake made a pretty reasonable difference in terms of damage. Plenty of youtube videos exposing this saw. "SawStop uses a different mechanism to drop the blade, but also employs an aluminum brake. In our testing on both top and front strikes, the blade stopped with less damage to my hand than Bosch’s Reaxx." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B3JsUGwt_Mg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B3JsUGwt_Mg
  - frosted-flakes 5y ago
    What is false? Did not Sawstop sue Bosch for patent infringement?
    - whoknowswhat11 5y ago
      "Bosch came out with a superior design that doesn't use a brake at all, but were barred from selling it in the US because it infringed SawStop's patents." The design was not superior and the infringement was not based on a brake or lack of one. The infringement was because of copy of the skin contact sensing / blade drop technology as what were called underlying elements. I think the case may still be ongoing though? This one went a long while.
      - frosted-flakes 5y ago
        I never said that the infringement was related to the brake. I thought I was pretty clear that the patents were about skin-sensing technology. And "not superior" is subjective. If the SawStop tech has enough false triggers and destroys as many blades as it apparently does based on what I've read (probably depends on material being cut), the increased cost almost certainly isn't worth it unless you're a high school shop class.
        foerbert 5y ago
        I don't think that was clear. You mentioned the Bosch system had a patent issue and immediately mentioned it didn't even use a break. While it's possible to read that as the Bosch system being superior because it lacks a break, the main topic was the patent issue, so it's more natural to read it as being related to that. Meanwhile there wasn't even a mention of the sensing technology.

slownews45 5y ago

The sawstop story is interesting. They basically tried to license it to the other saw companies. The other companies said hell no. We have the market. So sawstop started building their own (great) saws. They really are pretty to very high quality. The saw stop feature is also very effective. It's so effective that if you are running a woodworking shop in a school, or ever want to let your kids use your saw, or have staff using your saw, you really owe it to them to ALWAYS buy a sawstop. I've worked with a few owners who took the approach you did. Inevitably someone loses a finger - and after the dust settles and folks ask why they didn't put this VERY simple and not that expense solution in place - they usually regret it. Either they feel guilty for chisling on some $ and having someone lose function in their hand or if they are here in CA they pay out BIG TIME for their stupidity.

slownews45 5y ago
A series of meetings followed, in which Gass "negotiated with major players such as Ryobi, Delta, Black & Decker, Emerson, and Craftsman" in an attempt to license his invention; he followed those negotiations with a February 2001 presentation to the Defense Research Industry, a trade group for attorneys representing the power-tool industry.[7] That presentation immediately preceded one from Dan Lanier, Black & Decker's national coordinating counsel; Lanier's presentation gave Gass the impression he was unlikely to succeed in convincing major power tool manufacturers to license SawStop technology.[7] The license fee was going to be around 3% of wholesale (so about $3 on a $100 wholesale saw that goes for $200 retail). I think he came very close to licensing to ryobi? Anyways, if you think $3 for potentially incredibly QOL saving tech is too much for an inventor that actually invented something (and tested on his own finger) then I don't know what to tell you. That said, once someone's parents (if you run a woodshop in a school) or employee sues you - you may start valuing this invention a bit more.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- WalterBright 5y ago
  On the other hand (!), maybe the onus for the lost fingers is on SawStop for demanding those licensing fees.