Ripping Problem

[condeesteso]

I so like my bandsaw. I'm sure you have the advice above to sort this issue, but I cannot see why a table saw would be choice for ripping. Every time I go into a big mill anywhere I'm reminded what to use for ripping. Ripping on a table saw is like jointing with a spokeshave.

 

[RogerBoyle]

I so like my bandsaw. I'm sure you have the advice above to sort this issue, but I cannot see why a table saw would be choice for ripping. Every time I go into a big mill anywhere I'm reminded what to use for ripping. Ripping on a table saw is like jointing with a spokeshave.

Not to pick a fight LOL as i too love my bandsaw but i also do most ripping with a table saw
For the ease, speed and finish that it provides

1. Ease the table is not as high as the bandsaw and has much more area to work on
So i can stack the timbers on the other side of the fence (I've got full
Side and rear Table extensions)

2. Speed Lets face it a table saw cuts quicker than a bandsaw a big factor if you have
a lot of sawing to do

3. Finish There is no bandsaw yet made than can compete with the finish from a properly
Set up table saw which means less work finishing it ...

Where the bandsaw excels for me is cutting hardwood veneers as well as anything other than a 80mm straight cut

My opinion for what its worth is that your blade wasn't as sharp as you may have thought and has quickly become worse hence the burning . It would probably pay you to get a better quality blade as has been suggested else where in the thread and take your time when sawing and yes get one with fewer teeth if possible

Roger

 

[cutting solutions]

pm sent to sawyer

 

[condeesteso]

Hi Roger - yes, I fully expected that... I think in a production shop with space the speed and closer finish are benefits. But we're talking a 300mm machine minimum, with loads of space round it, and side and out tables... that's a massive footprint. And it's probably a 5hp machine. The equivalent bandsaw would be a resaw, really (2" blade, 5hp, power feed etc).
My view is not the majority one, but a good big bandsaw is a very efficient ripper: far smaller kerf so less energy input, less dust, less stock waste etc.
Well set-up, finish can be quite good, no match for table saw - but neither produce a finish anyway so there will be a next stage (planer etc).. And bandsaws take up a fraction of the space, work against a wall.
I think it is a fair observation that in volume ripping the mills always use bandsaws (big ones admittedly). If you were designing a machine to rip stock, the intuitively smart design would be the bandsaw... a powered evolution of the 2-man pit saw.
But I will be out-voted of course.

 

[stuartpaul]

But I will be out-voted of course.

Not by me you won't!

 

[Mcluma]

I think a lot has been said sofar

2 points stick out

1 TPI go for a coarser blade - probably 14tpi
2 Thin kerf - check that the blade is not a thin kerf, otherwize there is not enough room to take out the sawdust and it will bind/burn - make sure its a TCT blade

 

[RogerBoyle]

Hi Roger - yes, I fully expected that... I think in a production shop with space the speed and closer finish are benefits. But we're talking a 300mm machine minimum, with loads of space round it, and side and out tables... that's a massive footprint. And it's probably a 5hp machine. The equivalent bandsaw would be a resaw, really (2" blade, 5hp, power feed etc).
My view is not the majority one, but a good big bandsaw is a very efficient ripper: far smaller kerf so less energy input, less dust, less stock waste etc.
Well set-up, finish can be quite good, no match for table saw - but neither produce a finish anyway so there will be a next stage (planer etc).. And bandsaws take up a fraction of the space, work against a wall.
I think it is a fair observation that in volume ripping the mills always use bandsaws (big ones admittedly). If you were designing a machine to rip stock, the intuitively smart design would be the bandsaw... a powered evolution of the 2-man pit saw.
But I will be out-voted of course.

I would not out vote you either

Unfortunately Most joiners/Cabinet Makers workshops work to a time is money regime
as they have already agreed the Price ,Costed materials etc. and I am no different in that regard.Which means that a 1mm or 3mm Kerf is irrelevant but one pass on the planer rather than 2 or 3 does make a big difference :?

However most mills use the re-saws simply because of the fact that they can cut a bigger choice of timber sizes than then ever could with the table saw which means fewer machines Less expense etc. etc.

If i had to have just the one machine for me it would have to be the table saw for work but for home use only it would be the Band saw every time

Roger

 

[quickthorn]

Interesting thread.

I've got a similar question to the OP, but I'm ripping 2" ash boards on a Scheppach TKU (single phase 3hp or so) fitted with a 315 mm dia TCT blade with 28 teeth. I've got about 20 cu. ft that will all need ripping at some stage. I've not had the saw that long, and it makes steady progress without overheating on the samples I've tried so far, but it is steady, and I'm wondering whether the coarser 14 tooth blade mentioned above would be worth considering for this setup?

 

[cutting solutions]

14 teeth is probably too coarse for you.
18 teeth may be a better option but you may need to reduce the diameter to 300 mm as I suspect you may have difficulty getting 315 with 18 teeth.

 

[quickthorn]

14 teeth is probably too coarse for you.
18 teeth may be a better option but you may need to reduce the diameter to 300 mm as I suspect you may have difficulty getting 315 with 18 teeth.

OK, thanks for the reply