Interesting comment by Sawstop inventor

[germdoc]

Just a couple of comments:

Yes, Gass is in it to make a lot of money. Just like Edison, Bell, Jobs, Gates and practically every inventor and entrepreneur you can name. People who do stuff for any other reason are either monks or Communists or both.

The statement that push sticks and guards work "almost 100% of the time" proves the point. There are thousands of injuries from WW tools every year; it's that 1% of the time that's a killer. I have never had a major car accident but would not disable my airbag or seatbelts, great driver though I am. All of us who use power tools know they can be dangerous even when we use all the safety devices.

Final comment: just last week I saw Roy Underhill on TV touting the benefits of the Saw Stop. Maybe he was talking about the version for his Disstons. ;-)

[vaking]

Firstly I want to ask everybody - please do not let your emotions or opinions about Steve Gass interfere with your logic. My post is about SawStop technology, not Steve Gass.
I believe that this technology has good foundation in physics and is a valid safety device. Sawstop is likely to prevent a major accident that otherwise could have been an amputation and turn it into a minor cut. If you compare this to a seat-belt or an air-bag in a car - those also are safety features designed to minimize damage in an accident. Nobody ever said seat-belts guarantee that person will suffer no damage in any accident and you cannot sue seat-belt inventor if you do suffer. Seat-belts now are mandated by law.
Sawstop technology is not cheap. It is likely to add few hundred dollars to a cost of a saw just like seat-belts/air-bags add to cost of cars. Is it worth it - this is a real question.
If you are a professional woodworker and you cut off your finger - you will likely go on a disability and somebody will have to pay your medical bills and disability insurance after that. If you are a professional woodworker you are likely using some heavy-duty saw costing north of $1500. I believe it makes sense for you as a professional to pay extra few hundred to make sure you keep your limbs since this keeps food on your table. I also believe in this case government may step in and require that professional saw be equipped with such safety because if you do cut yourself - government will get stuck with some or all of your bills. Such law would simply be protecting government money - like seat-belt law.
It is different for amateur equipment like Ryobi. This is equipment for a hobby. It costs $200 to begin with - adding few hundred dollars to it will kill the market. It is like requiring that every bicycle be equipped with air-bag. There would be no bicycles.
I do think that Sawstop as a company knows what it does. They only make high quality saws aiming at professional market. These saws are able to stand their ground against any Unisaw or Powermatic even without safety technology because professionals will not accept low standards. Sawstop saws have already found their way to many woodworking teaching classes. Steve Gass reported that in 6 years in business there were over 1000 cases of Sawstop technology actually being triggered. Keep in mind that most start-ups don't last 6 years to begin with. Sawstop is here to stay.
I think in the near future all high-end saw manufacturers will have to find common language with Steve Gass or find a way around his patent or suffer loss of market share. Which way will it be - who knows? Rumor has it that 3-phase electical current was invented only because Nicola Tesla was very stubborn on royalties on a patent he held at the time.

[cabinetman]

Firstly I want to ask everybody - please do not let your emotions or opinions about Steve Gass interfere with your logic. My post is about SawStop technology, not Steve Gass.
I believe that this technology has good foundation in physics and is a valid safety device. Sawstop is likely to prevent a major accident that otherwise could have been an amputation and turn it into a minor cut.

I agree with your post 100%. To downplay the saw, or whatever Steve did, or his intentions is a poor reason to knock the saw. Nobody talks about the amount of money and research that it took to bring the saw to market. The saw is as good as anything on the market. I wish I invented it. I also can't blame him for whatever he tried to do, as it's also a business, and in business, it's all about making money, lots of it. My hats off to a guy that can get some corner on a market. Maybe we shouldn't buy a computer or software that Bill Gates has a connection.

Talk to anyone that has cut off a finger and ask if the cost of a Saw Stop would be worth it. I've driven a few men to the ER with their hands all wrapped up. It sure wasn't the saw that was at fault. If I was to buy a new saw today it would be a Saw Stop.

.

[jussi]

I also can't blame him for whatever he tried to do, as it's also a business, and in business, it's all about making money, lots of it.

.

I respectfully disagree. What he did is far from what I call ethical business practices. Don't get me wrong I'm a total capitalist and actually take offense to when people demonize businesses for making lots of money. But what Gass did (and many other companies try to as well) was to try to force the government to, in essence, force us to buy his product if we wanted a new table saw. Then take to it a step further, he testifies as an "expert" to say, but for his product, a man would have saved his finger. Not taking into account all the problems with equipping that type saw with his safety mechanism. Did he takes lots of risk monetarily in designing the device, I'm sure he did. But so do all entrepreneurs. There's no guarantee they'll be successful and definitely no excuse for forcing us to buy it. If the product is as good as he claims (and so far it seems to be) and he set his price point correctly then he'll make boat loads of cash. If not, well that's the price of business.

I think the SS is a great saw. Probably on par with the best in its category, even without the safety mechanism and if I had the budget to get a $3k+ saw I'd probably get it. But my budget is more int he 1k range. If companies were forced to implement his device and pay then I would have to either get a lower quality saw or increase my budget. Ah who am I kidding, I'd be looking on CL for a saw worth 3k but was selling for 1k

[Pappy]

There is no doubt that the Saw Stop Saw is a good saw and has itsw place in the market. Not too long after it came out Palm Harbor MFG, a mobile home mfg., replaced all their Unisaws with Saw Stops. For that type operation it is a good investment. One amputation accident in the shop would cost them more than all the saws.

For me, as a hobby woodworker, the cost would be hard to justify. Not just the initial outlay, but the cost of replacement braking devices and destroyed blades.

One of my customers sold the Saw Stop for a short time but dropped them because, as an independent dealer, the company was too difficult to deal with.

Gass's biggest mistake was to try to get the gov't to mandate his invention. He alienated a large portion of the woodworking community when he did that.

[leehljp]

Just a couple of comments:

Yes, Gass is in it to make a lot of money. Just like Edison, Bell, Jobs, Gates and practically every inventor and entrepreneur you can name. People who do stuff for any other reason are either monks or Communists or both.

Taking this thread OT but related to the above quote:

I disagree with this statement in part. I don't know Gass's reasons but I have my own feelings based on his track record, and my observations are in line with most people's here. However, the statement on the famed people is only partially true in the sense that "some" people, or a few are motivated by "money". But motivational reasons (and values) are as varied as personality types. Nicoli Tesla invented every bit as much as Edison but was driven by a totally different reason. Edison loved the fame as much as the money aspect but tended toward the fame. Tesla was driven by "discovery" and "inventing", not by being the first per se but by discovery. He owned enough patents that GE could have gone bankrupt if they had had to pay royalties, but Tesla let them off the hook to the tune of over a million dollars back in the 1890's. Tesla enjoyed the joy of discovery. Some people enjoy the fame, some enjoy the money. Some enjoy the control or power. And "all" of these are not like monks, communists or both, but some certainly are.

AS to Gates and Jobs, Gates loved the fame, money and power, Jobs sides towards being first - discovery and fame. Both bring money but money is not always the motivator, as some people think. Unfortunately, for many people, they cannot conceive of or accept a different reason or thought that is different from their own values. It doesn't compute to them. This is similar to a discussion on this board a couple of years ago when everything was brought down to only two reasons why people do things. It was reflective of specific people's values but excluded other values in the reasoning, which leads/led to faulty deductions. The underlying motivation is the individual's values. It can be "single/individual" reasons or values or combination of multiple reasons/values.

[tommyt654]

Well there is an alternative technology out there in the works, I,m looking forward to seeing if its a viable alternative and how and when it hits the streets it will be accepted. Cost will be a big factor as well. Hopefully when this comes to market it will be comparible to Sawstops technology and much more affordable as I believe his intent is to make it adaptable to all tablesaws, http://www.whirlwindtool.com/

[jussi]

Well there is an alternative technology out there in the works, I,m looking forward to seeing if its a viable alternative and how and when it hits the streets it will be accepted. Cost will be a big factor as well. Hopefully when this comes to market it will be comparible to Sawstops technology and much more affordable as I believe his intent is to make it adaptable to all tablesaws, http://www.whirlwindtool.com/

Looks good. I love competition in the marketplace. The video wasn't great but it kind of looked liked he stopped pushing once the blade stopped. I'm curious as to what kind of damaged have happened if he continued. Obviously nowhere near the damage as a spinning blade. Since the SS not only stops the blade but retracts it as well, I'm curious as to whether Gass found there was still significant injury even with a stationary blade during his test runs. If this actually makes it to market I'd love to see a side by side comparison with SS.

[tommyt654]

We can only hope it gets too market. I would think knowing Gass,s tactics it would prolly be tied up in some sort of litigation for a while for some type of patent infringement B.S. knowing how he operates.

[radhak]

I want to add a clarification - I have no objection to Gass pricing his saw high, or even licensing his technology at a high price. If the market allows it, more power to him. The saw works great, the safety feature is futuristic in utility, and if I had money, or was using the saw enough, I would have bought it myself.

What I have an objection to, is Gass trying to strong-arm all manufacturers to buy his technology by inciting law suits and appearing as an expert witness in them. He wants to use regulation and tort to expand his business, and doesn't seem to care that it might be the end of amateur, DIY, woodworking as we know it, or at least, as cheap as we know it.

Yes, many have compared this with the car airbag - it is mandated yet the impact it has on the car's price incremental is negligible. But the thing is that , the average increase in cost of a car because of airbags is only around $400-$500 max, around 2/2.5 %. For a Unisaw a corresponding figure would be around $75, and for a $500 contractor saw it would be $12.

The day the sawstop technology is available to us at comparable prices (between $20 and $80), is when we can discuss the merits of the tool, instead of getting distracted by where we'd get the money for it from!

[natausch]

High entry price and consumables, the business model is solid. The pricing on their saws are high, but not absurd.

Lets also remember that when he pitched the technology to manufacturers it was the 9%+ of their net; not profit, that was the licensing cost.

The question still remains is the technology worth the additional cost. If you have a serious accident/amputation; yes by all means. However, what is the risk of that if you are using other available safety features; riving knife, guard, push shoe, aligned fence, proper position and preparing for every cut?

[Black wallnut]

Strong Reminder

A post has been removed from this discussion. In that post a member personally attacked Steve Gass. That type of behaviour will not be tolerated! It is one thing to dislike the man and his ways it is altogether different to call him names. This forum is not about attacking Steve Gass. As much as I do not agree with his tactics and business practices he is not deserving of being attacked on our forum. Other forums may allow this but we do not.

[moc]

Gass: Even more strikingly, in almost 30% of the cases, a push stick was being used. The reason this latter statistic is interesting is that I suspect that push sticks are used in a smaller portion of table saw operations than they are of accidents. The implication is that push sticks may well statistically increase the chance of contacting the blade.

Or maybe the implication is just that push sticks are statistically more likely to be used during more dangerous cuts.

I thank you for allowing me to vent my pet peeves in public.

*moc

[Rich P]

I thought this site was about woodworking and not about venting (unless it's about dust). Less venting and more sawdust please. BW, lock this puppy please.

[Cochese]

What's the reason to lock it?