From: roche@cs.rochester.edu (James Roche)
Subject: Final word on TS versus RAS
Reply-To: roche@cs.rochester.edu
Organization: University of Rochester Computer Science Department
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 1992 17:50:49 GMT
Expires: 5 May 92

Bennett Leeds has volunteered to write a summary of the table saw/radial
arm saw debate to be added to the monthly FAQ list. It is attached
below. It is long, but I think it is well written and unbiased.

If you think there are important facts missing from the summary please
let me know and I'll consider adding them.

Jim "keeper of the FAQ" Roche
roche@cs.rochester.edu


	Table saws work best for ripping. Radial arm saws work best for
	crosscutting, but are limited by their arm's length. Both 
	saws will perform both tasks. The radial arm is more adaptable for 
	non-sawing tasks. For instance, overhead routing, surface planing, and 
	drum sanding attachments are available for some radial arm saws. You
	can buy a disk sanding attachment for use on most table saws.

	Ripping on the radial arm saw is difficult because it is necessary
	to push the lumber under the motor housing.  This problem can be
	minimized by use of pushsticks and holddown wheels. Maximum rip width
	is normally limited by the length of the arm. Building a secondary rip
	fence on the other side of the table from the column will enable you to
	rip wider pieces, but the off-cut piece width is then limited. Radial
	arm saws are more prone to overheating during rips in thick wood since
	the teeth stay in the cut longer, unless you cut substantially into
	the table top and even then there is no place for the sawdust to exit.

	Crosscutting on the table saw is difficult because it is tough to
	keep a board much longer than 4 ft square to the blade.  This
	problem can be minimized by building a good sliding panel cutter. Some
	table saws have built-in sliding tables, and aftermarket sliding table
	attachments are available for most saws. A couple of saws have sliding
	arbors, enabling them to work as inverted radial arm saws. The arbors
	typically don't slide as far as the length of many radial arms (for a
	review of 2 of these saws, see the April 1992 issue of FWW).

	Both saws are capable of accurate work. The radial arm saw, with its
	cantilevered arm attached to a cantilevered column, is typically less
	rigid than the table saw, which usually have their arbor trunions 
	bolted to the table in a wide pattern. Worn arm bearing in radial arm 
	saws can also contribute to wander in the cut. In table saws, play of
	the miter gauge bar will adversely affect accuracy.

	Both table saws and radial arm saws need to be aligned to work
	optimally. There are more aligning tasks to be performed on a radial
	arm saw than on a table saw. Radial arm saws typically require
	realignment more frequently than table saw, perhaps because of the 
	stresses put on the cantilevered assemblies.

	Radial arm saws don't need as much space around them as table saws for
	performing equivalent tasks. On the radial arm saw, boards are always
	oriented the same way whether you are ripping or crosscutting, so you
	need space to the left and right of the	blade, and only as wide as the
	widest board you're cutting. On the table saws, boards are oriented at 
	right angles depending on whether you're ripping or crosscutting. Thus,
	you need space in front and in back for ripping, and to the left and 
	right as well for crosscutting.

	It seems to be easier to engineer and manufacture a table saw than a
	radial arm saw, which has more moving parts that must withstand large
	forces without deflection or play. It can therefore be argued that if
	you're on a budget, a cheap table saw may work better for you than a 
	cheap radial arm saw.

	Some people say the radial arm saw is more dangerous because the blade
	is exposed above the work surface, and because the blade's location
	varies as the cut progresses. Angled crosscutting is particularly
	dangerous since the blade is now cutting where one normally holds the
	work. The spin direction of the blade tends to lift the work off of
	the table when ripping, and can pull the carriage into the work
	(resulting in binding of the saw or serious injury to a careless
	operator) in the crosscut position. So-called "safety-blades" have
	a shoulder in front of each tooth, thus limiting the amount of pull
	generated and reducing these tendencies.

	Some people say the table saw is more dangerous because you can't 
	see where the blade is like you can with the radial arm saw. On the
	other hand, the blade is always in the same spot on the table. The spin 
	action of the table saw's blade tends to keep the work down on the 
	table, but it can also throw the work, and off-cuts, back at the
	operator.

	Both machines are very dangerous and should be treated with much
	respect.

	As with all tool buying decisions, you should consider your intended
	applications, both now and in the future. The general consensus is that
	if you're building things like jungle gyms, house additions, or trim
	work (moldings), a radial arm saw may be best. If you're building 
	things like fine furniture or cabinets, a table saw may be more a
	more appropriate choice.

	A number of people have reported that the addition of a motorized
	miter box to a table saw is a satisfying combination.

	Taunton Press publishes a softcover book entitled "Fine Woodworking on
	The Small Workshop." It contains a number of articles on designing and
	buying equipment for small shops, but is geared to furnituremaking.
	The majority of the recommendations are for getting a table saw first,
	with one writer claiming a bandsaw is the first tool to buy.
-- 
Jim Roche
roche@cs.rochester.edu
University of Rochester Computer Science Department Rochester, NY 14627
Newsgroups: rec.woodworking