PSA to table saw owners....downsize that 10" blade

Good idea. I guess less dust due to smaller kerf? Maybe lower blade tip speed as well?

So if you already have a decent 10" blade, what's the point? All you're doing is spending an extra $20 on top of whatever you already spent on the other blade to get the same functionality. And from a safety perspective, having to remove your riving blade increases your risk of the blade getting pinched and causing a kickback event.

I suspect the lower dust has to do with the fewer teeth. It's probably going to take more "chunks" rather than a fine dust. He could use a 24 tooth ripping blade for the same effect.

I don't see anything wrong with the idea, but I don't really see the benefits, especially if you have to remove safety equipment to make it work.

C

CNeufeld wrote: ↑ So if you already have a decent 10" blade, what's the point? All you're doing is spending an extra $20 on top of whatever you already spent on the other blade to get the same functionality. And from a safety perspective, having to remove your riving blade increases your risk of the blade getting pinched and causing a kickback event.

I suspect the lower dust has to do with the fewer teeth. It's probably going to take more "chunks" rather than a fine dust. He could use a 24 tooth ripping blade for the same effect.

I don't see anything wrong with the idea, but I don't really see the benefits, especially if you have to remove safety equipment to make it work.

C

I think they just removed the safety equipment for demonstration purposes.

CNeufeld wrote: ↑ So if you already have a decent 10" blade, what's the point? All you're doing is spending an extra $20 on top of whatever you already spent on the other blade to get the same functionality. And from a safety perspective, having to remove your riving blade increases your risk of the blade getting pinched and causing a kickback event.

I suspect the lower dust has to do with the fewer teeth. It's probably going to take more "chunks" rather than a fine dust. He could use a 24 tooth ripping blade for the same effect.

I don't see anything wrong with the idea, but I don't really see the benefits, especially if you have to remove safety equipment to make it work.

C

Did you watch the videos? Among other things, lower diameter blade means lower speed, less torque, less blade for wood to grab onto which decrease probability of vicious kick backs. Also with thinner kerf, blade less likely to pinch /kick back again.

A 7.25 inch blade will also deflect less (for a given kerf) and wear less (blade has a lot less weight) on the table saw thus prolonging life of saw as well.

7 inch blade just feel safer as well due to diameter size...for a given cut, there's less blade width in contact with your wood [not sure if that makes sense].

Two of those Diablo blades go for sub $20 at HomeDepot.ca

Re. riving knife you have to get a thinner one or just remove it...the wood workers discussed the riving knife in their video.

The real question is if I can use a smaller blade with more teeth. 10” cabinet saw blades are pricey.

My cabinet table saw spins at 4,000 rpm at the arbor, do the math at what the rpm is 7 1/4 inches out and I doubt most blades are safe/rated at that speed. Too lazy to check what the compact. portable job site saws spin at that most people have but check that before installing a blade intended for a circular saw.

Zamboni wrote: ↑ My cabinet table saw spins at 4,000 rpm at the arbor, do the math at what the rpm is 7 1/4 inches out and I doubt most blades are safe/rated at that speed. Too lazy to check what the compact. portable job site saws spin at that most people have but check that before installing a blade intended for a circular saw.

I think (but dont know) that blades are rated for arbor speed, not tip speed. Too much math for consumers. Still, a good point.

A Dewalt circ saw blade for $13 is rated for 7,000 RPM. I would think the bigger issue is arbor size. I think my table saw arbor is bigger than my circular saws. The dewalt one I looked at on lowes.ca just now is a 5/8” arbor for the 7-1/4” and 1” for the 10” blades. There is no way anyone should be drilling out a blade for a larger arbor.

Edit: I clicked a 12” bade by accident which is a 1” arbor. The 10” blades are 5/8”

If we follow that same logic, is it safer to use an angle grinder with a smaller/coaser blade than intended and removing the guard? lol
Food for thought..

I started using circular saw blades on my table saw many years ago for cutting laminate flooring. Initially intended as a cheap throw away solution I quickly realised the smaller blades have many other advantages.

Makes little sense. Reduced cutting capacity, increased danger due to lack of a riving blade. And to argue that a smaller blade is more stable is irrelevant. It wasn't an issue to begin with on a 10".

I haven’t had a guard on my table saw since 2000. 99% of the mobile job sites I am on the guard is removed. Riving knifes for non-through cuts are a no go.

Interesting. I’ll admit the blade guard has been off the table saw for years.

Maybe I’ll give this a try... I don’t have any nice 7-1/4 blades though.

bjl

ps, maybe I’ll put on the 4-1/2 blade haha.

Jerico wrote: ↑I haven’t had a guard on my table saw since 2000. 99% of the mobile job sites I am on the guard is removed. Riving knifes for non-through cuts are a no go.

Wood working noob here. Can you explain your last sentence?

I have a circular saw with 7-1/4 blade and when cutting MDF it's make as much dust as my table saw. To cut 2*4 I guess it doesn't matter but to cut cabinet parts (plywood, MDF), fine blade gives better results.

adblink182 wrote: ↑ Wood working noob here. Can you explain your last sentence?

Riving knifes are the pointy little things that prevent kickback. So if you aren’t cutting all the way through, they prevent you from cutting then drawing the work back. Even if you cut and shut off the saw with the wood still in it, it doesn’t allow you to pull back just a hair so the blade doesn’t spin down with wood against it.

Plus, most of them are rough and end up messing up nice plywood.

engineered wrote: ↑ Good idea. I guess less dust due to smaller kerf? Maybe lower blade tip speed as well?

This would be my guess.

Surface-per-minute increases with the larger blade as also the speed which one can cut the same material.

You guys fancy. My table saw only has on and off.

bjl

Jerico wrote: ↑ I haven’t had a guard on my table saw since 2000. 99% of the mobile job sites I am on the guard is removed. Riving knifes for non-through cuts are a no go.

We had MOL show up to one of our jobs and write up the carpenters for not having guards. They had to go buy new saws that day to continue work as the blade guards were long gone.

Jerico wrote: ↑ Riving knifes are the pointy little things that prevent kickback. So if you aren’t cutting all the way through, they prevent you from cutting then drawing the work back. Even if you cut and shut off the saw with the wood still in it, it doesn’t allow you to pull back just a hair so the blade doesn’t spin down with wood against it.

Plus, most of them are rough and end up messing up nice plywood.

The riving knife looks like a shark fin and it's sits behind the blade.

The pointy things are called pawls which also helps with kickbacks. The pawls are usually hooked onto the riving knife.

You can have riving knife without pawls but not the other way around... Ie can't have pawls without riving knife.