Author Topic: A rather interesting review of cordless track saws  (Read 3772 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline SRSemenza

  • Global Moderator
  • *
  • Posts: 9356
  • Finger Lakes Region, NY State , USA
Re: A rather interesting review of cordless track saws
« Reply #30 on: September 13, 2020, 11:48 PM »
They used what came with the saw - each saw used its standard blade.
   So that could definitely have something ( a lot) to do with the cut quality and speed of cut. I am betting that they did not all have the same type of blade. Pretty hard to make a true comparison that way. If that is the case it is too bad because it really screws up an otherwise well done comparison test.
Seth
I'm quite sure all plunge saws of this class come standard with 48 tooth 5 deg. hook finish blade.

Yup, was just looking them up. All listed with 48 tooth.


Seth

Festool USA does not pre-approve the contents of this website nor endorse the application or use of any Festool product in any way other than in the manner described in the Festool Instruction Manual. To reduce the risk of serious injury and/or damage to your Festool product, always read, understand and follow all warnings and instructions in your Festool product's Instruction Manual. Although Festool strives for accuracy in the website material, the website may contain inaccuracies. Festool makes no representations about the accuracy, reliability, completeness or timeliness of the material on this website or about the results to be obtained from using the website. Festool and its affiliates cannot be responsible for improper postings or your reliance on the website's material. Your use of any material contained on this website is entirely at your own risk. The content contained on this site is provided for informational purposes only and does not constitute professional advice.


Offline Cheese

  • Posts: 7770
Re: A rather interesting review of cordless track saws
« Reply #31 on: September 14, 2020, 01:11 AM »
So that could definitely have something ( a lot) to do with the cut quality and speed of cut. I am betting that they did not all have the same type of blade. Pretty hard to make a true comparison that way. If that is the case it is too bad because it really screws up an otherwise well done comparison test.

Ya, well I look at it as the same as a car review from Car & Driver. You take a production automobile (a saw), put it through its paces using the standard tires (a saw blade) and report the results. If the automobile manufacturer is concerned enough about paring the proper tires (saw blade) with their car to make sure that there is some synergism between the components then that's how the automobile is sold. I think the same thing applies to the saw tests. The saws were released and are sold with their respective saw blades...I consider this to be a recommendation from the manufacturer, otherwise the saws wouldn't come with a saw blade already installed.

Besides, the Dewalt is an oddball as it has a different diameter and a different arbor size than the rest...how would you equivocate that difference?

Offline Svar

  • Posts: 2219
Re: A rather interesting review of cordless track saws
« Reply #32 on: September 14, 2020, 01:28 AM »
Besides, the Dewalt is an oddball as it has a different diameter and a different arbor size than the rest...
20 mm arbor, printed on the blade.

Offline Cheese

  • Posts: 7770
Re: A rather interesting review of cordless track saws
« Reply #33 on: September 14, 2020, 01:45 AM »
20 mm arbor, printed on the blade.

Whoops...but my thought process still stands.  [big grin] 

Besides, how the heck do I know that, I'm certainly not a champion of Dewalt...I've been down too many dead end roads with those people.   [mad]  [mad]

Offline DeformedTree

  • Posts: 929
Re: A rather interesting review of cordless track saws
« Reply #34 on: September 14, 2020, 02:06 AM »
So that could definitely have something ( a lot) to do with the cut quality and speed of cut. I am betting that they did not all have the same type of blade. Pretty hard to make a true comparison that way. If that is the case it is too bad because it really screws up an otherwise well done comparison test.

Ya, well I look at it as the same as a car review from Car & Driver. You take a production automobile (a saw), put it through its paces using the standard tires (a saw blade) and report the results. If the automobile manufacturer is concerned enough about paring the proper tires (saw blade) with their car to make sure that there is some synergism between the components then that's how the automobile is sold. I think the same thing applies to the saw tests. The saws were released and are sold with their respective saw blades...I consider this to be a recommendation from the manufacturer, otherwise the saws wouldn't come with a saw blade already installed.

Besides, the Dewalt is an oddball as it has a different diameter and a different arbor size than the rest...how would you equivocate that difference?

I would add to the analogy, that if a reviewer said "we want to make this fair and put the same tires on all the cars", they would have the same issue as all the cars have different size rims.   So in this case, if there was a 48tooth diablo blade for all them, would it be fair? as the saws are designed with different kerf widths and so forth.  Also if you were doing the car test, and one of the cars came with the tire you put on all of them, it would be unfair as it was setup to that tire.

Like you say, it's fair to use the factory blade. Most folks will only ever run factory blades in these saws.  It's not an old framing saw you will run thru heck and trash blades on.   I'd actually be very curious for manufactures to explain how they decided on kerf widths,  and the blade size/arbor, etc.   Once you leave the US, it looks like everyone does "whatever", which is ok, but interesting they all do different things.  Like folks point out about if the HKC had just a slightly bigger blade so it could cut 45s thru 2 bys.  Or why does an Erika 85 not have a slightly bigger blade so it can single pass 4x material.


Offline SRSemenza

  • Global Moderator
  • *
  • Posts: 9356
  • Finger Lakes Region, NY State , USA
Re: A rather interesting review of cordless track saws
« Reply #35 on: September 14, 2020, 10:24 AM »
Just to keep this from going off track due to my first post about the blades .......................  please also see above where svar points out (and I confirmed) that they all have 48 tooth blades. Which should have been stated in the video along with the comment that the saws were tested using the supplied blades.

Seth

Offline Cheese

  • Posts: 7770
Re: A rather interesting review of cordless track saws
« Reply #36 on: September 14, 2020, 02:23 PM »
Back to the plunge saw review, they could have gone a step further and calculated the volume of wood removed per watt. How about putting an HKC blade on the TSC?

I think putting an HKC blade on the TSC would make a huge difference in run time. It has a 1.8 mm kerf like the Mafell. The only problem is it's only a 32 tooth blade. So to get a 48 tooth, 1.8 mm kerf blade they'd have to install the Mafell blade which happens to be 162 mm in diameter.  [eek]

Speaking about blade diameter, how about putting the 162 mm Mafell blade on the HKC so that it will cleanly cut 2x material at a 45º angle.

Offline Michael Kellough

  • Posts: 4888
Re: A rather interesting review of cordless track saws
« Reply #37 on: September 14, 2020, 04:27 PM »
The Mafell “55” blades are also 160mm. I do remember reading that the blades 162mm but all the blades at Timberwolf are 160.

The Makita tracksaw blade is 165mm (6.5”).

The Mafell 55 ripping blade has 16 teeth and cost the same as the Festool 12 tooth Panther.

Interesting to see that the Mafell 55 4 tooth diamond blade is $419 compared to $145 for the Festool 4 tooth diamond. The Festool blade maintains the 2.2mm kerf while the Mafell rakes 3mm.

Offline Michael Kellough

  • Posts: 4888
Re: A rather interesting review of cordless track saws
« Reply #38 on: September 14, 2020, 04:39 PM »
According to this thread at MUF the MT55cc can run 165mm diameter blades.

Offline Svar

  • Posts: 2219
Re: A rather interesting review of cordless track saws
« Reply #39 on: September 14, 2020, 04:39 PM »
The Mafell “55” blades are also 160mm. I do remember reading that the blades 162mm but all the blades at Timberwolf are 160.
My has 162mm engraved on it and it measures 162mm.

Offline Lincoln

  • Posts: 97
Re: A rather interesting review of cordless track saws
« Reply #40 on: September 14, 2020, 05:35 PM »
There's only one blade that is 162mm - that's the one you're meant to use if making use of the scoring/scribing function. Rest of the Mafell blades are 160mm.

Offline Lincoln

  • Posts: 97
Re: A rather interesting review of cordless track saws
« Reply #41 on: September 14, 2020, 05:39 PM »
https://www.timberwolftools.com/tct-saw-blade-162-x-1-2-1-8-x-20-mm-6-3-8-in-48-teeth-at

It states that it's so you can 'cut 2" cutting depth on track', but I disagree with that.

Offline Michael Kellough

  • Posts: 4888
Re: A rather interesting review of cordless track saws
« Reply #42 on: September 14, 2020, 08:26 PM »
Thanks Lincoln, that was the one blade in the bunch that I didn’t zoom in on.

Offline Cheese

  • Posts: 7770
Re: A rather interesting review of cordless track saws
« Reply #43 on: September 14, 2020, 09:52 PM »
My has 162mm engraved on it and it measures 162mm.

What he said. +1


Offline JimD

  • Posts: 497
Re: A rather interesting review of cordless track saws
« Reply #44 on: September 18, 2020, 12:50 PM »
My track saw is a DeWalt, the blades are 6.5 inches, 165mm, with a 20mm arbor - same as Makita.  I saw the same review and others by the same group.  I consider them OK, not great.  They use a lot of subjective criteria.  But their point about limited clearance for my hand on the DeWalt is something I would check out before buying one.  But with three DeWalt tracks, there is nothing about the other saws that could cause me to start over.  I like the review, it is a good way to get some information on a variety of saws it would be hard to otherwise get the same information about.  But I don't think the DeWalt cordless is a bad saw just because they rated it the worst. 

Offline aloysius

  • Posts: 433
Re: A rather interesting review of cordless track saws
« Reply #45 on: September 19, 2020, 12:40 AM »
I've been using nominally 165mm blades in my MT55 & 170s in my KSS 55 no problems at all.  Unsure it that's the actual (measureable) diameters.  For me life's too short to be overly concerned about such things.

As long as the blade has a nice thin kerf (both saws are CAS 18V cordless) & work without fouling then I'm happy.
FOG-wit since '95:  Some say since birth...

Offline fshanno

  • Posts: 1010
Re: A rather interesting review of cordless track saws
« Reply #46 on: October 08, 2020, 05:21 PM »
Interesting review.  The results are predictable.  Mafell is the best, Festool is very good and Makita is the best value. 

For me the choice would be easy because....

a.  I don't have any batteries that will work in any track saw.
b.  I already have a corded saw that yields quality cuts.
c.  I have lots of Festool track

So Makita is the runaway winner.


The one thing we learn from history is that we never learn from history.