Ryobi Gems

[Grovest]

Although I will be upgrading much of my workshop having outgrown many of them including my Craftsman branded BT3 - which I am passing down to my kid as he starts his shop - I was surprised at how many of the Craftsman tools I have were manufactured by Ryobi.

My most recent find was that my 'high end' Craftsman plunge router - variable speed 2.5 hp - which feels every bit as solid and works as well as the $500 Makita I had at work - turned out to be a Ryobi yet under their own name they have never (at least to my knowledge) offered anything but low cost products.

Was this a fluke, or has Ryobi often manufactured 'higher end' products sold exclusively under other private labels?

[bmyers]

Craftsman tools that start with:

175, 315, 316, or 973 are Ryobi built.

As with nearly any tool manufacturer, there are gems and there are shiny turds.

Sources: http://vintagemachinery.org/craftsma...facturers.aspx



B

[woodturner]

My most recent find was that my 'high end' Craftsman plunge router - variable speed 2.5 hp - which feels every bit as solid and works as well as the $500 Makita I had at work - turned out to be a Ryobi yet under their own name they have never (at least to my knowledge) offered anything but low cost products.

Was this a fluke, or has Ryobi often manufactured 'higher end' products sold exclusively under other private labels?

Ryobi sold higher end products under their own brand name for years. I have an RE600, a 3 HP plunge router, as well as an RA2500 radial arm saw, arguably the best RAS for less than $1K ever made. I also have their benchtop lathe - which never really seemed to catch on, but spawned the benchtop lathe market which other manufacturers such as Delta and Jet now fill.

At some point Ryobi did transition to doing private label tools, and it seems like they stopped producing the larger, higher end tools at that point. They seem to have stopped making the larger tools around 2000, and had stopped making the larger handhelds such as the RE600 by 2008 or so. There was a recall on the portable RAS, wonder if that might have had something to do with it.

[JSUPreston]

Are you talking about this router? http://www.craftsman.com/craftsman-1...3&blockType=G3

I recently bought it as well...the old fixed based Craftsman that I had finally died for the last time. I have one of the Bosch/C'man router tables that were clearanced out a few years ago and didn't want to bother with having to modify the funky plate that was in the table, so I picked up one of them.

Unfortunately for me, I like it better than the Ridgid combo set that I've had for a while now, so I ordered a couple of the $13 Grizzly router table plates and spend a few hours last Friday night making a new plate for the router table. The Ridgid is now in the table, and the C'man in my new handheld router. The C'man just seems to have been thought out more than the Ridgid.

[cwsmith]

Ryobi's RAS, certainly would be "argueable" but let's not! (I'm a big RAS fan though, but love my Emerson-built 73' Craftsman. )

My first power tools were all Craftsman... a 7" circular saw, a belt sander, a sabre saw, and a great 3/8" reversible drill. All were purchased in late 60's and were made by Ryobi.

CWS

[cabinetman]

Ryobi's RAS, certainly would be "argueable" but let's not! (I'm a big RAS fan though, but love my Emerson-built 73' Craftsman. )

My first power tools were all Craftsman... a 7" circular saw, a belt sander, a sabre saw, and a great 3/8" reversible drill. All were purchased in late 60's and were made by Ryobi.

CWS

In those times, if the tool was labeled as Craftsman, that pretty much was all that was needed. Sears (and Roebuck), and Craftsman, were household names.



.

[woodturner]

Ryobi's RAS, certainly would be "argueable" but let's not! (I'm a big RAS fan though, but love my Emerson-built 73' Craftsman. )

Are you familiar with the Ryobi RA2500? Nothing wrong with the older Craftsmans or DeWalts, but the industrial quality tools in the 1980's sold for over $1K when equipped like the Ryobi. The think I really, really like about the RA2500 is that it is simple to set up and holds its accuracy. I've used most brands of RAS's, but none of them (even the $4000 Rockwells) have maintained accuracy over time like the Ryobi. The problem was so significant that many shops stopped using RASs (today most shops use miter saws in an attempt to partially replace the functionality of the RAS). Taunton published a book in the 1980's about how to build jigs for a RAS to overcome the "inherent accuracy limitations", but I found I didn't need it with the Ryobi.

Ryobi really innovated the lower cost but high end tools and largely enabled the current amateur woodworking tool market. They innovated the "lunchbox" planers, economical and accurate RASs and small lathes, higher powered controllable routers, electronic soft start, the BT3X, etc.

[tommyt654]

My thought on the RAS you describe indicate its belt driven,while the belts are replaceable they also provide for drivetrain problems associated with other Ryobi tools such as our venerable BT, thats a consideration to concern one with dealing in power tools,the RA2500 may be a good tool,but when compared to others such as the afforementioned DeWalts and Delta's I have reliability doubts about its performance capabilitys and durability,perhaps why it was short lived and not considered a worthwhile investment for reconstruction as are the others.

[cabinetman]

My thought on the RAS you describe indicate its belt driven,while the belts are replaceable they also provide for drivetrain problems associated with other Ryobi tools such as our venerable BT, thats a consideration to concern one with dealing in power tools,the RA2500 may be a good tool,but when compared to others such as the afforementioned DeWalts and Delta's I have reliability doubts about its performance capabilitys and durability,perhaps why it was short lived and not considered a worthwhile investment for reconstruction as are the others.

+1. I agree. I've always had at least two RAS's set up. One for miter cuts, and one only for 90 ° crosscuts. One of the professional shops I mentor had two of those Ryobi RAS's. They were difficult to keep adjusted, parts were hard to get, and the carriage didn't roll as smoothly as they should. They weren't considered a professional tool, like Rockwell or DeWalt. RAS's have always been one of the primary tools in a professional shop, and likely will always be.

.

[Grovest]

Are you talking about this router? http://www.craftsman.com/craftsman-1...3&blockType=G3

Nope. This one looked almost identical to the RE600 but with different handles and is entirely black.

[woodturner]

My thought on the RAS you describe indicate its belt driven,while the belts are replaceable they also provide for drivetrain problems associated with other Ryobi tools such as our venerable BT

It is belt driven, but mine still has the original belt, so that's a 20 year or so old belt and it's still working fine. It's easily replaced if necessary and readily available aftermarket.

the RA2500 may be a good tool,but when compared to others such as the afforementioned DeWalts and Delta's I have reliability doubts about its performance capabilitys and durability,perhaps why it was short lived

I've found the RA2500 to be much more reliable than the DeWalts and Deltas. I bought the RA2500 when I was running the shop full time and needed a saw that would stand up to the daily rigors of continuous use. It's the only RAS I kept when I shifted to part-time and a smaller, more hand tool oriented shop, the others had failed years earlier and weren't worth fixing. As others have mentioned, the DeWalts and Deltas don't stay in adjustment well, so you pretty much have to set them for a fixed angle and leave them alone if you want accurate cuts - or spend 15 minutes readjusting them if you change the angle. The Ryobi is the only RAS I have used that keeps the accuracy when changing angles and bevels - other than $5K industrial saws. It's very easy to adjust, keeps it's accuracy, and the carriage rolls so much more smoothly than the others, it's amazing.

They are still sought after, and people do rebuild them. I suspect they stopped making them for two reasons - one was the "bad press" for the 8" portable recall, which some people seemed to assume applied to the 10" RA2500 as well, sort of "guilt by association". The other is that DeWalt was pretty firmly entrenched at that point in time, and really ramped up their marketing and sales to counter the "Ryobi threat". I suspect Ryobi had too much trouble making inroads against the behemoth in the market, even though Ryobi was selling to the pro market and DeWalt was targeting the home shops more and more. I still talk to the dealer where I bought it from time to time, and he indicates that most of their sales were to pro shops, and that most of them are still using their RA2500s. If they had improved them and could have competed against DeWalt just a little longer, they would probably be the dominant RAS today, since DeWalt crumbled not long after Ryobi dropped the RA2500.

[tommyt654]

Funny, I hadn't seen or heard from anyone here or for that matter anywhere else regarding problems you associate with the DeWalts or Delta's for that matter,most in fact praise they are the most accurate cutting tool in their arsenals when it comes to an easy to use cross-cutting tool, mine i.e. is set up primarily for dado cuts as I have a couple of Mitersaw's for other cuts that I'll use. I would never consider it for ripping,thats what my tablesaws are for. While it might be nice to use it like a router as the RA 2500 has the capability for I have several routers as well as 2 tables for that. Really no sense in arguing the point other than I find it very hard to believe it's in anyway superior to the DeWalt's or Delta's of the past.I'm sure you find it a very nice tool and I might myself,but I have my trusted DeWalt from the 60's still running like a top and cutting lumber like a hot knife thru butter

[woodturner]

While it might be nice to use it like a router as the RA 2500 has the capability for I have several routers as well as 2 tables for that.

I do find the router/shaper power takeoff useful. BTW, that is what the belt drives - the blade is direct drive. DeWalt also had the power takeoff, but as I recall the speed was lower and it wasn't really useful as a shaper. When the RA2500 was introduced, the only real option for pin routers was the Onsrud, at a very high price point. The RA2500 made a great pin router and I think that helped a lot with their market acceptance.

It's unfortunate that most woodworkers - pro and amateur, then and now - seem to view the RAS as a carpentry tool rather than a woodworking tool. The only RASs I see anymore are at box stores and lumber yards. Given a RAS that is set accurately and will maintain its accuracy, an RAS is a great tool for crosscuts and joinery, really better than a table saw. Ideally a shop would have an RAS for crosscut work and a TS for ripping.

I wonder if all the recalls (for all of the manufacturers, really) as well as some of the highly publicized RAS accidents of the 1980's are responsible for the effective "death" of the RAS? It would be interesting to determine why the RAS fell so far out of favor.

[greenacres2]

I use the heck out of my old Emerson built Craftsman, and for the $70 or $80 i paid it was a tremendous value. If i have any objection to it--it's the floor space that it eats. On the flip side, the "modern RAS"--a SCMS really wouldn't consume much less space, even if mounted to a collapsable stand.

As i do my rearrangement, my RAS table will be raised about a quarter inch so it's the same height as the table saw--and will be better able to serve as an outfeed for the TS (at least for boards, i don't know that it will work for panels) while the TS will be able to serve as stock support for the RAS.

earl

[woodturner]

As i do my rearrangement, my RAS table will be raised about a quarter inch so it's the same height as the table saw--and will be better able to serve as an outfeed for the TS (at least for boards, i don't know that it will work for panels) while the TS will be able to serve as stock support for the RAS.

If you look at books on shop layout published during the years when the RAS was more common, that's the layout they suggest. The RAS is often placed along a wall, with tables to the side, and the TS is placed perpendicular to the right hand table of the RAS. The RAS table then serves as both the outfeed table for the table saw and the outfeed table for the RAS. I had a prior shop set up that way and it worked well. I think you will find you like that arrangement.