BT3000 Motor - is it worth it?

[TJG]

So, I saw this on ebay:

http://cgi.ebay.com/15amp-Ryobi-BT30...QQcmdZViewItem

I have a BT3100, and it's working fine - I don't need a motor. I was curious, however, about the price - $209.95. In a worst case scenario, a brand new BT3100 would run $299 + tax (in most cases less). If you bought it, parted it out and charged prices lower than the "Buy it Now" sellers on ebay, you could make back close to all your money, possibly more than you paid (depending on what you actually paid), and still have the motor.

So I contacted the the seller and asked the question. Their response:

"The motor also fits the original BT3000 table saw which you could get a plethora of attachments for. For someone with a BT3000 and all the accessories it is a small price to pay to be able to continue using it. The BT3100 saw doesn't offer near the versatility or the expandability that the original (BT3000) saw did so there is no reason to replace the motors on the new saws unless they are still covered under warranty."

So, I'm curious - any truth to their response, or are they looking for people with more money than brains. If it is a truthful response, what are the differences?

Tom

[JR]

So, I'm curious - any truth to their response,

No, there's no truth to it.

[John Hunter]

The BT3100 saw doesn't offer near the versatility or the expandability that the original (BT3000) saw

Obviously the guy has no clue! I have both the BT3000 and the BT3100 and they are for all purposes identical and the accessories are interchangeable. IMHO the motor is not worth $209.95 and you could get one at a much better price. Often they are sold here by members that are parting out a saw. If it were me I would buy a new BT3100 and part out the old saw. That way you could end up getting the new saw for practically nothing.

[LinuxRandal]

Political speechwriter?

So, I saw this on ebay:

The BT3100 saw doesn't offer near the versatility or the expandability that the original (BT3000)
Tom

You ever notice how speechwriters can lie with statistics, or tell the truth with a rarely used meaning of a word? How about double talk and incomplete sentences, like
The BT3100 saw doesn't offer near the versatility (of me to find a sucker) or the expanability (of my wallet) that the original bt3000 does.

So he is TECHNICALLY correct, based on all the "facts" he didn't give you.