Resawing thick Maple on BT3?

[dkerfoot]

I have a CM 21829 (Sears new version of BT3)

I also have a 6"x10"x2" chunk of maple that came in a Rockler Assortment Box http://www.rockler.com/product.cfm?page=843

I am considering trying to resaw it using Suwat's excellent Multi-purpose Tall fence: http://woodworking.phruksawan.com/Mu...nce/index.html

The question is: Am I crazy to try to feed that thick of maple through a BT3? I am confident that I can do it safely using featherboards, etc - I am just looking for a reality check on burning up the motor, snapping the drive belts, scorching the wood, etc. Obviously it would take 2 passes, I am just not sure if it is wise to try to rip 3"+ of maple per pass.

My blade is a Tenryu Rapid Cut 40T Combination Blade.

I have no band saw or any other tool that would be a better candidate for resawing this.

Thanks!

[LCHIEN]

I've never done this but I think its doable.
What I would consider -
More than 2 passes.
Try 2 passes each side at 1-3/4" deep,
Then raise to 3" and make the last two passes for a total of four
Even 6 passes might work.
You might leave enough width for a light planing operation if burning does occur. maple is very easy to burn.
You should have a very sharp, ripping only blade. Like a new or recently sharpened 24 tooth blade. make sure the saw is not power limited in any way by too small an extension cord or having other appliances on the same circuit.


read the 7th post in this thread, I illustrate some of the factors involved in cutting with the right speed vs. the power of the saw.
http://www.bt3central.com/showthread...ht=chart+speed

[JimD]

I have ripped oak that was more than my BT3100 would do in one pass, a little over 3 1/2 inches thick. It is harder when the blade is burried like this. I've done it with the original Freud blade and also with a dedicated ripping blade (also Freud with 24 teeth). The BT3100 will do it, but you have to go slow and I have not been able to get a normal relatively smooth cut. Some burning, I would expect worst for maple, and some roughness in the cut. I cut a little oversize and planned it smooth. You could also recut 1/32 off to clean it up. Feather boards are a good idea.

I've never tried 6 or 7 inches wide resaw but I would not be afraid to. You will need two edges square to one face to do this and definitely feather boards. A dedicated ripping blade is also highly recommended, it will help the speed and burning. I sometimes get swirl marks, however, which I think happens when the sawdust does not clear out well.

Jim

[dkerfoot]

Thanks guys - very helpful. Especially the chart Loring! I was already thinking multiple passes, but it is good to have that confirmed.

I think for now I will let that chunk of maple mature a while longer, since I have other tool desires that over-ride my new-found need for a dedicated ripping blade...

Generally speaking, how much advantage would there be to a thin kerf 24 tooth ripping blade compared to a thin kerf, 30 tooth WWII? If I were to get a dedicated ripping blade, it would probably not be one of the top-shelf models.

Thanks!

[JimD]

I've never used a WWII but if it is similar to my Freud combination blades, the reduction in effort on thick rips will be noticable. The 24 tooth Freud is not a real expensive blade, by the way. I use the full width kerf. I have both types of blades and I do not notice a big difference in power required. I think the full kerf blades may flex a little less and the clearance of the teeth to the plate is bigger which may reduce drag. It could just be me, too, since others think the thin kerf take noticably less power. They make flat top, low tooth, deep gullet rippers in thin kerf, too.

I did a quick search and found ripping blades from about $37 and up. The Freud thin kerf ripper was about $37 from Amazon and would be a good addition to your blade set IMHO.

Jim

[Knottscott]

...
I think for now I will let that chunk of maple mature a while longer, since I have other tool desires that over-ride my new-found need for a dedicated ripping blade...

Generally speaking, how much advantage would there be to a thin kerf 24 tooth ripping blade compared to a thin kerf, 30 tooth WWII? If I were to get a dedicated ripping blade, it would probably not be one of the top-shelf models.

Thanks!

I assume your Tenryu 40T is an RS 25540 with a kerf width of 0.118"? (nearly full kerf, but not quite) My blade collection includes a Tenryu RS25540, 30T WWII, 40T WWII, and a few 24T TK rippers, and had a full kerf Freud LM72 full kerf ripper. A decent 24T TK like the LU87 or Infinity 010-124 should have the easiest time of it. The 30T WWII will cut noticeably easier than the 40T WWII, but not as easily as the 24T TK. 3" maple will likely push the 30T WWII to it's limits though...it will however leave a cleaner cut than the 24T blade. In your favor is the fact that the piece is fairly short. Is it "hard" maple, or could it be soft maple (which is still fairly hard)? Something like the LU87 or DW7124PT or Amana AGE 24T TK MD10-240TB (use BT310 code), go on sale for < $30 shipped so they're not overly expensive.

Jim - If all else is equal, the thinner blade should cut with less resistance. My LU87 TK ripper cuts noticeably faster than my LM72 ripper did when the going gets tough (like with 2" hard maple) ....they're have pretty much the same tooth geometry but are different kerf widths. A typical full kerf blade is roughly 1/8" wide at the teeth, and a TK is ~ 3/32" wide. Even though that's only a difference of 1/32", the full kerf is ~ 33% wider than the TK. Think in terms of the width of a mower deck...a 40" deck is 33% wider than a 30" deck, and requires proportionately more power to take a wider swath....same is true of saw blades if all other parameters are equal, provided the quality is good enough to not incur vibration, and there's not significant vibration being introduced by the saw. It also makes a difference if the wood has been jointed flat and straight vs twisted.

[dkerfoot]

I assume your Tenryu 40T is an RS 25540

Yes

Is it "hard" maple, or could it be soft maple (which is still fairly hard)?

It is beyond my ability to ID it. Came in a Rockler Grab Box. Definitely Maple.

I have been on a bit of a spending spree lately, so I am trying to avoid adding yet another $30-$40 purchase. Hence my decision to let the wood mellow a bit longer. I do plan to pick up a 30 Tooth WWII if they ever go on sale again because I tend to be the type to leave one blade on forever and it seems like as close to an ideal compromise as possible. My tiny little shop requires enough set-up and take down that swapping out blades is just one step too many.

I may add a ripping blade to my arsenal at some point, but it is a lower priority.

[Knottscott]

Yes




It is beyond my ability to ID it. Came in a Rockler Grab Box. Definitely Maple.

I have been on a bit of a spending spree lately, so I am trying to avoid adding yet another $30-$40 purchase. Hence my decision to let the wood mellow a bit longer. I do plan to pick up a 30 Tooth WWII if they ever go on sale again because I tend to be the type to leave one blade on forever and it seems like as close to an ideal compromise as possible. My tiny little shop requires enough set-up and take down that swapping out blades is just one step too many.

I may add a ripping blade to my arsenal at some point, but it is a lower priority.

Far be it from me to discourage someone from buying a new blade! FWIW, I really really like my WWII 30T TK. It's really difficult to discern the cuts from those done with the 40T, but it sure does have an easier time with tough rips. Feels like a 24T, cuts more like a 40T. To those looking into the purchase of a WWII....if you use much hardwood over 3/4", IMHO the 30T is a wiser choice than the 40T. The 40T is slightly better in plywood. As always.... YMMV. Hope you find a deal!

[cgallery]

I know this is gonna sound nuts, but I'd raise the blade 1/2" at a time. You can always clean it up with a little scraping. But cutting 1/2" at a time (from each side) means with each blade height increase you'll be cutting 1" of material (in two passes), so still plenty fast and plenty each on the saw.

The other thing I'll say is that much of the maple I've cut has been pretty mobile. I'd make sure to use the splitter, and be ready to kill the power at a heartbeat's notice.

[gsmittle]

I know this is gonna sound nuts, but I'd raise the blade 1/2" at a time. You can always clean it up with a little scraping. But cutting 1/2" at a time (from each side) means with each blade height increase you'll be cutting 1" of material (in two passes), so still plenty fast and plenty each on the saw.

The other thing I'll say is that much of the maple I've cut has been pretty mobile. I'd make sure to use the splitter, and be ready to kill the power at a heartbeat's notice.

I just resawed some hard maple using much the same method. Since my shop electricity is limited to a single 20-amp circuit at the moment (subpanel coming this summer, I hope), I went with much smaller raises, about two turns of the handle each pass. I also cut each side twice to center the kerf. That was probably overkill, but I needed two pieces the same thickness. I used the stock Italian Ryobi blade.

g.

[Bill in Buena Park]

I have a CM 21829 (Sears new version of BT3)

I also have a 6"x10"x2" chunk of maple that came in a Rockler Assortment Box http://www.rockler.com/product.cfm?page=843

I am guessing Doug actually has a 2 x 6 x 10in, which is 10in length running with the grain. My question to the maple workers is: Would Doug need to approach this resaw differently as a 10in rip versus a 10in crosscut?

[cgallery]

I also cut each side twice to center the kerf.

g.

I think that is smart, as it opens-up the kerf and reduces friction (on at least one side of the blade).

[JimD]

With respect to blade swaping, I find that having the tools I need right there on the BT3100 makes changing blades a lot less of a hassle. Under the saw, I have a drawer for blades and the blade changing wrenches. In another drawer to the right, I have screwdrivers. When all I have to do is reach in a drawer, and not walk around the shop to assemble and find the tools I need, it makes changing blades a lot less of a hassle. I swap a lot. I have a "junk" blade on the saw right now because I was ripping some 2x4s I took out of a wall and was worried I might hit something. I also use a dedicated ripping blade, one of several "all-around" blades (sometimes I change to avoid cleaning right then), a dado set, etc.

Jim

[dkerfoot]

With respect to blade swaping, I find that having the tools I need right there on the BT3100 makes changing blades a lot less of a hassle.

Honestly, that is a small part of the hassle. Changing blades isn't hard, but imagine a 10'x11' shop with a workbench, table saw, drill press, belt/disk sander, CMS and large router table! Everything is on wheels. I roll the last tool out of the way, roll the new one to the center, and connect the dust collector that I keep just outside the door.

At that point, a 30 tooth WWII sounds like the perfect blade...

It also helps explain why I pay a premium for pre-surfaced lumber in small quantities!