First let me start by saying I can’t stand lawyers and bureaucrats. They hamper progress and drain the economy dry. Sawstop is famous for a saw blade mechanism that abruptly stops when it detects human flesh. It is a great idea and I would love to have one. However, they are insanely priced. The tool manufacturers couldn’t justify the extra cost to add these to their products. So the inventor being the super lawyer that he is decided to lobby the government. He wanted to make his product mandatory on every saw sold. This would dramatically increase table saw prices to astronomical levels. Contractors are already trying to cut costs and this would hurt them.
Bosch recently showed off their new saw blade safety technology called react. It is a lot better than the Sawstop because you don’t have to replace an $80 part and blade every time it is triggered. Swats engages the blade and the react pushes it away. It also does not damage the blade and you can be back working in minutes. Now I am no patent lawyer and I have no clue if Sawstop has a case here. What I do know is that Bosch has over 4800 patents and a fleet of attorneys to battle it out. The end of the Sawstop saga could soon be near! Check out the videos below.
He can’t really sure on the method of how the blade is stopped Bosch’s system is completely different. I think its going to come down to is the detection circuitry that’s where they lawsuit will focus on.
I am interested to see how this comes out. I think the SawStop is a nice saw, but I not care for how the guy tried to force regulation to use his technology.
Regulation is why you family has airbags and seatbelts in you car. Do you think that should be an option also? This thinking and argument has been around in virtually every safety device that use everyday.
The 3-point seat belt doesn’t (and did not, when first invented) have a licensing fee that had to be paid out in order to use it (http://jalopnik.com/volvo-gave-away-their-most-important-invention-to-save-1069825878). Forcing the regulations means forcing other companies to license the Sawstop patent and will make it a regulation-mandated monopoly.
sawstop is a joke. They tried to force every saw maker (via regulations) to use their technology. They are going to get a lot of hate for trying to settle this via the courts rather than just innovating.
Copied from http://lumberjocks.com/intelligen/blog/41659
“I think it’s fair to say that Steven Gass didn’t invent his blade brake with purely altruistic intentions. From an ideological perspective, I personally think if Gass (or at least the SawStop legal counsel) wants to preach about how SawStop only wants to prevent injuries and that the rest of the industry is self-serving and evil, he should give away the technology, as Volvo did with the seatbelt—or make it really cheap. Otherwise he seems disingenuous, at best. But that’s just my opinion. If you check out the SawStop wikipedia page, the Power Tool Institute and its members do seem to have some valid objections to the technology, including some questions about liability, should the braking system fail.”
Either the people against this have never used a table saw or are just plain stupid. It’s just common sense. It’s a table with high rpm blade protruding out of it. People complaining about cost because they don’t know anything about tool quality and are too stupid to realize their (Sawstop) most expensive saw paid for itself after the first accident. Somewhere around 6k for the big saw… not $100-150 tops for new cartridge and blade, lol. All that not mentioning that the inventor after failing to get companies to buy it decided to put his product in some of the highest quality saws on the market. Don’t really care about the politics but until a company can get their saw to do the same thing with out requiring any contact with the blade Sawstop won’t be outdone. If you want proof take a look in success wood shops everywhere. The vast majority has at least one of saw stops products in it because proffesionals understand that they are super high quality saws that just happen to happen to posses a fool proof safety feature that no other cabinet/table saw has ever done.
This is so funny, that’s only ten fingers a day. If he wins nobody will ever buy a table saw again, you can’t afford it.
Should do a review on both saws. Sawstop is too expensive and only has a one time use thing Bosch seems like the winner
I despise litigious fools too. And overpriced tools. I’ve been following conversations about this for the past week and just wanted to stir up some dust. So, to be Devil’s advocate.
Imagine you worked very hard to develop your brain child, it cost you tons of money and time, and then some large, established company basically copies your idea through a little legal finagling and deceptive changing of the mechanism, even making it better through their infinite capacity for R&D–the overall concept remaining the EXACT same–and all during your patent period.
Yes, your product is revolutionary, but people couldn’t afford it before, and now, with some billion dollar conglomerate designing one, it could be in reach for everyone. Just not your brand! Still, after years of lobbying to have them required on all upcoming equipment in an attempt to subsidize the cost of the equipment and make it affordable, it seems Goliath is going to beat David. It seems it doesn’t matter your invention would revolutionize workplace safety across the board (something invaluable), that it would reduce the price for your invention overall, and that it would make you richer than Richie Rich–another American Dream. And no one cares that the government has subsidized such (and lesser) endeavors before.
Looks like you’re about to be bankrupt, sitting on a crap company, and another company’s stock is going to rise by a blip.
Now, I am just being Devil’s advocate here, but I think this is a pretty interesting case of intellectual property rights.
Either way, Dan’s got it spot on, “I can’t stand lawyers and bureaucrats. They hamper progress and drain the economy dry.”
Dan–Is the focus of the lawsuit about the technology involved (did Bosch infringe on his patent(s)), or is this.about having to buy into the safety aspects of Saw Stop (i.e., is the Government going to force us to give up our Constitutional right to slice off an occasional finger?). I also didn’t hear about Bosch’s technology; is this an add-on accessory that can be incorporated (retrofit) into their current and older models of table saws, or do you have to buy a whole new saw? I assume it’s the latter; if so, what is Bosch charging for their saw with this accessory built into it, and how does that compare with the Saw Stop unit? And how much more will this model cost than a similar, non-equipped Bosch table saw?
Just as important, has the Bosch circuitry been independently proven to be an equivalent or better technology than Saw Stop, not just that the saw blade won’t be destroyed by deployment? What does Consumer Reports have to say about this? We’ll need this information in order to make an informed purchasing decision.
I think you guys should run a head-to-head comparison to settle this. The only question remaining now is, who makes a juicier frank for test purposes? Is it Ball Park Franks, Oscar Mayer, Nathan’s or…?
I remember learning in a safety class that there is a difference between accident prevention and injury prevention. (For example, anti-lock brakes on your car are to prevent accidents but seat belts are to prevent injury) These things are clearly about injury prevention.
Since I have never actually seen anyone nip themselves on a saw that I’ve worked with, it makes me wonder if more development shouldn’t go into accident prevention. For some reason I have reservations about the sawstop. Does it create a false sense of security?
Ian–That’s a great comment and observation. The problem has various parameters to it, however. Some people are “nipped” (or worse) because they overextended themselves, slipped and fell into a blade; others lost their concentration making repetitive cuts, putting themselves in harm’s way. Still others, new to the job, didn’t have an appreciation yet for the dangers inherent in using a table saw and just ran their fingers or hand into the blade. Others were injured while using a push stick to guide their work thru the blade and there was kickback, which caused the injury. And a number are hurt because they removed the safety guards on their equipment, which enabled the other situations.
Two things contribute to accidents of all kinds: 1) It was almost lunchtime, and the operator hurried a bit too much to finish the job so he and Jerry could go to lunch. 2) It was the end of the day, and Fred hurried to finish a part of the job so he could home on time. And, as we all know, you’re supposed to let the blade do the cutting. When you push a dull blade to cut faster, rather than replacing it, you set yourself up for an accident.
You can’t end accidents once and for all; you can only remind folks to pay attention to their work. There’s no accounting for a workman’s state-of-mind when he arrived at work that day, either. If he had a fight with his wife that morning, or he’s suffering from money problems, or he’s drinking or using drugs, his mind won’t be on the job at hand. Weekly toolbox safety talks can help, but aren’t a cure-all. As a team, the workers need to watch out for one another, intervening when they see a co-worker at risk. As you can see, there are no simple answers to this problem.
Not if you have any brains and have the proper respect for a table saw that you should have.
So your article implies that there is a lawsuit between the two, but doesn’t state that. Am I missing something?
As far as cost, the sawstop portable saw and the Bosch saw about the same price!
Yes there is a lawsuit
This technology will be on all tablesaws in ten years. either the saw stop or Bosch or some other type, and I for one can’t wait. Anybody that doesn’t want this isn’t thinking straight. Sort out the money issues and get it done. Shouldn’t cost anymore to incorporate this into the tablesaw.