think this is worth $100?

[LCHIEN]

its a very nicely restored solid saw in pretty clean condition for the age and good working order for around $400 invested and the invaluable thing you got was some satisfaction and a good deal of knowledge. About the only thing that might improve it would be a new paint job.

[cabinetman]

Nice saw, and a great deal. A big improvement would be a Biesemeyer or Unifence.

.

[toolguy1000]

....... Great technique on moving the saw, I would be a little concerned using quick grip clamps (that's what they look like to me) for the exchange though....

had me a little concerned to. not so much for the holding power of the clamps but for the 1 post on the floor jack. had that slipped, it wouldn't have been pretty.

and thanks to all for the previous comments. it was a good learning experience, and although it is probably not a bad deal for a unisaw (that i now know intimately and can feel confident that everything has been done properly), i was most surprised at how fast these things can become pretty deep money pits.

[chopnhack]

"money pits" - I think that can apply to nearly any hobby, true our equipment and materials can be pricey, but so can photography, astronomy, boating, golfing you name it!

[toolguy1000]

i finally fabricated a motor cover and got the blade and fence aligned (or so i hope). a five cut test of the blade alignment went like this. i squared the miter gauge to the blade and made 5 cuts, always rotating the workpiece so the just cut edge was against the miter gauge fence (face). after the fifth cut, i got these results: the part of the workpiece that contacted the blade first as it was pushed though the blade is 41/64" and the end of the workpiece that contacted the blade last was 39/64". that's a 1/32" difference. the first 4 pieces cut were a total of 40" long and the last piece was 10" long. so is that 1/32" of over 40" or 50"? a little interpretive help here would be appreciated.

next, i aligned the fence with the same miter slot used to align the blade for parallelism. the workpiece was 46" long and the difference was 1/128" over ~4". am i right in assuming this equates to a difference of 1/64" over 8'? again, constructive interpretive comments would be appreciated.

this saw apprears to be ready for duty again. cabinet dust collection, powered by my large shop vac until i replace the existing subpanel to provide for another 220v circuit (keeping the same 30A service. more than adequate for the unisaw (16A, 220v) and the delta 50-850 (6A, 220v) to be powered simultaneously) to power the unisaw seems to be, while not outstanding, surprisingly adequate. while it wasn't a complete teardown and restoration, it's an original condition '72 unisaw with plenty of power:

[chopnhack]

No Loring tonight?

I'll attempt, but I am not an engineer. The test you conducted is sometimes know as the five cut square. The difference between the front of the workpiece and the rear after the final cut is your error, but you need to multiply that by the times cut. Therefore you have an error of 5/32" over a length of 200" IF you started with a 40" square then kept rotating it until the final cut was made on the 40" side. I don't see how you could do that with a miter gauge, so please elaborate on your method more. It sounds more like you ripped sequential strips?

Rereading, did you start with a 10" square? Then your error would be 5/32" over 50", probably could use a little tweaking.

[LCHIEN]

hey we got other lives, you know... putting out fires from 7 to 4 at work, drove 55 miles to get home, got home at 5:20, played with the grandson until 6:30, played tennis until 9:45, showered, grabbed a bite to eat, just got to the computer for the first time since leaving work.

And your explanation sounds good to me.

[toolguy1000]

i used this five cut method:

http://www.thewoodshop.20m.com/five_cut_method_swf.htm

and would the workpiece have to be symetrical? even if it was symetrical, once the first few cuts are made, the workpiece is no longer symetrical. the piece i used was more rectangular than square, and the offcuts from the crosscuts (no rip cuts) totalled 40" for 4 cuts and 50" for 5 cuts.

what i can't wrap my head around is whether or not my error per foot is more or less than .001" per foot. some insight here woudl be appreciated. and how did you get 5/32" over 50", chopnhack?

[chopnhack]

Just teasing Loring, you do a fine job and your analytical skills have always been appreciated, certainly not only by me!

Toolguy, your variance between A and B was only 1/32, multiply that by the cuts, in your case 5 cuts, cut 1 starts with side 1 and cut 5 finishes back on side 1 leading to the accumulated error. Thus 5 x 1/32 = 5/32 error. What was the original size of side 1, I estimated by your figures that it was roughly 10" so you multiply that as well x 5 to get 5/32" error over a 50" length.

5/32 in decimal is 0.15625 over a 4.167' length (50"/12") = 0.037" per foot as I said it needs some tweaking. Hope this helps :-)

[toolguy1000]

thanks for the error/foot calculation, but isn't it the sequential cutting, with each freshly cut side placed against the face of the miter gauge, what creates the additive error? this write up of the method seems to indicate that:

http://benchmark.20m.com/articles/Th...eSidedCut.html

if the additive error over 50" is 1/32", wouldn't multiplying it by 5 be further multiplying the error? or am i missing something?

[tommyt654]

Might wanna put a good straightedge on the fence to check it as well, just a thought

[chopnhack]

Good catch toolguy, sorry about that. Yes, you are right, 1/32 over 5 x 10" so 1/32 over 50" length or about 0.008 in per foot.

[toolguy1000]

Good catch toolguy, sorry about that. Yes, you are right, 1/32 over 5 x 10" so 1/32 over 50" length or about 0.008 in per foot.

thanks. i think i'm going to do the five cut test again once i adjust my incra1000 miter gauge to the unisaw. when i check the blade alignment with a digital dial gauge, i get what looks like almost perfect alignment so i'm thinking the miter gauge might be the issue.

[tommyt654]

I'd take that scrap plywood off and attach a piece of extruded aluminum to it, better and straighter than that plywood for sure. Thats looks to be where the problem is, your fence mounted to your miter gauge,not the gauge itself