Anybody know about a clue-up TS blade?

[JimD]

Any decent blade will give edges you can use for glue-up. I do it all the time with a Freud rip or combination blade.

Jim

[lcm1947]

So Jim which Freud blade do you have if I may ask?

[ragswl4]

I'm with you about the number of teeth on a blade. One would think that the more teeth, the smoother the cut. It is confusing at times when looking for a new blade. It would appear that the saw blade engineers are developing newer/better blades all the time. There is a lot of geometry involved in the designs so the number of teeth is just one aspect of a blade. I have found that I have to do a lot of research before I buy a blade and ask a lot of questions here, as you have done. Then make a choice.

Sometimes it makes me want the good old days, Ford or Chevy or Dodge. Simpler choices then.

[lcm1947]

Yes rags I agree about too many choices now-a-days. Life sure was simplier back in the good old days, but then again one can't knock all the neat stuff available today neither. What you gonna do. Thanks for the reply.

[Knottscott]

I'm with you about the number of teeth on a blade. One would think that the more teeth, the smoother the cut. It is confusing at times when looking for a new blade. It would appear that the saw blade engineers are developing newer/better blades all the time. There is a lot of geometry involved in the designs so the number of teeth is just one aspect of a blade....

Here's an example of some new advancements in blade design, and quite frankly, I"m surprised it's taken this long for someone to try this.

Compare the new Freud P410 Fusion with the Freud LU88R010. Ignoring the kerf difference, just check out the configuration and geometry...both use the same TiCo H-Density carbide and Perma-shield coating, and both have a steep positive hook angle (could be the same but I'm not sure of the angle of the Fusion), both have anti-vibration slots.

The Fusion - 40T, Hi-ATB grind, steep positive hook angle, double angle side grind , and a low side clearance.


The LU88 - 60T, ATB grind, 15 degree positive hook angle, single angle side grind, and typical side clearance.


The LU88 is really nice blade IMHO. It's listed as a crosscut blade but will rip nicely to ~ 6/4" due to the hook angle...the smaller gullets don't seem to be an issue in ripping efficiency. Old school common logic would have the LU88 cutting cleaner than the 40T P410, but ripping less efficiently. I doubt that's the case. (I also doubt Freud would market the $100 P410 from their Premier line as a "the new standard" if a $45 blade from their Industrial line outcuts it....maybe I'm wrong).

I saw the P410 demoed, but haven't had the opportunity to try it yet. I have used the LU88 alot. I have tried blades with the Hi-ATB grind and think it's a downright impressive grind. In an 80T configuration like the LU80 (F810) the Hi-ATB cuts cleaner than any blade I've used, including other 80 ATB grinds, but none of them will rip very thick material worth a hoot without burning and bogging the saw. The Fusion uses a grind that's typically known as a crosscut grind that excels at laminate/veneer/plywood cuts, and adapted it to a general purpose configuration that will rip and crosscut very cleanly (though not as efficient as an flat top grind). Which of these two blades cuts cleaner? Wish I could say for sure, but I'm leaning toward the Fusion with those super clean cutting teeth. If the LU88 featured the Hi-ATB, it'd make sense that it would offer the cleaner cut. Like most design choices, there is a downside to the Hi-ATB...it tends to dull faster than other grinds with shallower bevels. The TCG is the toughest grind, followed by the FTG, ATB/R, and ATB, with the Hi-ATB being the most fragile b/c of those sharp points...never a free lunch.

The correct blade for the job is often a more important factor that the cleanest cutting blade. The Fusion would probably make for a lousy bulk ripper for a commercial operation, but I think it's a very clever (and overdue) approach to a general purpose blade for a hobbyist.

Side note - I also had the LU86, which is essentially a 40T blade with the same variations as the LU88 except for tooth count. In this case, all other parameters are equal AFAIK. The LU86 cuts well but the LU88 definitely cuts cleaner (IMO it cuts cleaner than any of the 40T blades I've used, but the Fusion could be the exception). I haven't had a bulk ripping contest witht these, but logic would dictate that the LU86 40T would have an easier time in thick material.

The LU86 - 40T, ATB grind, 15 degree positive hook angle, single angle side grind, and typical side clearance.

[lcm1947]

Thanks Dustmight for the informative & interesting post. I appreciate all that typing you did. So sounds like you know your blades pretty good. Man! there is a lot to know about TS blades. Saying all that though it still sounds like it still boils down to blade count unless I'm missing something. I say that because as you pointed out in this sentence

"Side note - I also had the LU86, which is essentially a 40T blade with the same variations as the LU88 except for tooth count. In this case, all other parameters are equal AFAIK. The LU86 cuts well but the LU88 definitely cuts cleaner (IMO it cuts cleaner than any of the 40T blades I've used, but the Fusion could be the exception). I haven't had a bulk ripping contest witht these, but logic would dictate that the LU86 40T would have an easier time in thick material."


it shows that the 60 teeth cuts cleaner then the 40 teeth which is understood. Right? Anyway, I'm beginning to see ( I think ) that a so called glue-line blade is 30 to 40 teeth. I also think I see that maybe the reason these fewer teeth on such a blade is because they don't seal the wood as much as a smoother cutting ( higher count ) blade does and this allows for a more open pore cut insuring a better glue bond. I also think though in order for this rougher cutting blade ( glue-line one ) to work well enough to allow you to joint with it it would probably have to be really sharp or even though the pores are open the cut itself wouldn't be good enough for mating ( jointing ) the boards for a glue-up. Now I may be all wet or missing something but that's what I'm getting out of this reading I've been doing or that's at least what I think they're saying.

[Knottscott]

Thanks Dustmight for the informative & interesting post. I appreciate all that typing you did. So sounds like you know your blades pretty good. Man! there is a lot to know about TS blades. Saying all that though it still sounds like it still boils down to blade count unless I'm missing something.

I don't think you're missing anything...the higher tooth count will equate to a cleaner cut IF the other parameters are the same, but it's really important not to discount the other factors....there will always be exceptions to the general rules of thumb. It's better to evaluate on a case by case basis IMO. In the case of the LU86 vs LU88, yep... the higher tooth count cuts cleaner b/c the other factors are equal, but that wouldn't necessarily be the case comparing the 40T WWII to something like a 60T Oldham "Finishing" blade ($20 at HD) ...my experience tells me the WWII will make the cleaner cut, will stay sharp longer, and will rip faster (best of both worlds). If the quality of the blade's body, tolerances/precision, sharpening, etc., isn't up to snuff, all bets are off regarding the predictable effects of the design parameters.

It's also important to keep in mind that cleaner cut isn't always the primary criteria. Ie: A Hi-ATB blade like the Forrest Duraline or Frued LU80 will make a cleaner cut in melamine than a TCG blade like the LU97R010, but the TCG blade will stay sharp longer, will cut "clean enough", and can be a better choice in the long run depending on how much cutting needs to be done. Correct choice for the application can be the overriding factor too.

HTH...

[lcm1947]

Thanks for replying Jeffrey. Good points and I see what you mean. I guess I started out thinking only about the tooth count and then realized about the quality of the blade so now I'm seeing the light on other factors thanks to you and others. It certainly is a learning process. Thanks for the information though. I do appreciate each and every reply I get. I am light years ahead of where I'd be if not for this forum and you guys.