|
|
Post by glennz01 on Apr 21, 2024 18:06:14 GMT -5
So I know there's the theory to go with the least size for the rock... but I was also thinking with the larger blades having more diamond and on smaller rock more cooling, thus possibly faster cutting as well.
So has anyone ran the numbers to see which ones are the longest lasting, economical reguardless to initial cost?
|
|
realrockhound
Cave Dweller 
Chucking leaverite at tweekers
Member since June 2020
Posts: 4,495
|
Post by realrockhound on Apr 22, 2024 10:25:36 GMT -5
14” Been using mine for years now running horse laxative as a coolant. Sucker has years of life left on the blade. I cut everything in that saw. Pieces that just barely make the cut all the way down to crap I could use on my hand trim saw. No numbers ran, just through experience.
I hardly ever use my 20”, 16”, 10” etc…
|
|
|
|
Post by glennz01 on Apr 22, 2024 10:39:57 GMT -5
14” Been using mine for years now running horse laxative as a coolant. Sucker has years of life left on the blade. I cut everything in that saw. Pieces that just barely make the cut all the way down to crap I could use on my hand trim saw. No numbers ran, just through experience. I hardly ever use my 20”, 16”, 10” etc… Yeah, for my my 16 inch is my go to, but I wonder about say the 24 or larger ones, I've got some rocks I can't even cut on my 24 inch lol. I know blade thickness is usually thicker on larger ones, but wondering about my 24 inch that's in Nevada since it can have any blade the way it was home built |
|
roQhound
starting to spend too much on rocks
Member since March 2023
Posts: 104
|
Post by roQhound on Apr 22, 2024 18:19:52 GMT -5
14” Been using mine for years now running horse laxative as a coolant. Sucker has years of life left on the blade. I cut everything in that saw. Pieces that just barely make the cut all the way down to crap I could use on my hand trim saw. No numbers ran, just through experience. I hardly ever use my 20”, 16”, 10” etc… This is helpful. I really like the idea of having a 24" slab saw just in case I've got something really large to slab up, but everything keeps bringing me back to starting with a 14" and most of what I aquire would be just right for a 14". I think I'll be starting there and add a larger one if I find a need for it down the road. Thanks! |
|
|
|
Post by glennz01 on Apr 22, 2024 20:43:06 GMT -5
14” Been using mine for years now running horse laxative as a coolant. Sucker has years of life left on the blade. I cut everything in that saw. Pieces that just barely make the cut all the way down to crap I could use on my hand trim saw. No numbers ran, just through experience. I hardly ever use my 20”, 16”, 10” etc… This is helpful. I really like the idea of having a 24" slab saw just in case I've got something really large to slab up, but everything keeps bringing me back to starting with a 14" and most of what I aquire would be just right for a 14". I think I'll be starting there and add a larger one if I find a need for it down the road. Thanks! It's best to start with what you'd need the most, but if it's setup right like ine one I've got (ive got 11 saws) that blades can change. I'm not sure if I want to have smaller blades for it or if it's more economical to run larger blade |
|
|
|
Post by Rockoonz on Apr 23, 2024 2:03:00 GMT -5
Bigger blades cost more and are thicker, leaving a lot of the rock as mud in the cooling oil. If I'm cutting a chunk of good seraphinite that would barely fit in my 10" saw, and it gets me one slab more, that slab is probably worth more than the blade I cut it with. If I really have to, I might cut it in half in my 14 and finish the halves in the 10 to lose less. It might even start in the 18, move to the 14, and finally cut the slabs in the 10.
Personally, with the exception of some personally collected stuff that I work as a momento of the experience, if the chunk in the saw isn't going to produce enough value to make saw blades a minor consideration, it's not going in my saws. As it says on the HP home page, life's too short to cut ugly rocks.
|
|
|
|
Post by glennz01 on Apr 23, 2024 9:42:12 GMT -5
Bigger blades cost more and are thicker, leaving a lot of the rock as mud in the cooling oil. If I'm cutting a chunk of good seraphinite that would barely fit in my 10" saw, and it gets me one slab more, that slab is probably worth more than the blade I cut it with. If I really have to, I might cut it in half in my 14 and finish the halves in the 10 to lose less. It might even start in the 18, move to the 14, and finally cut the slabs in the 10. Personally, with the exception of some personally collected stuff that I work as a momento of the experience, if the chunk in the saw isn't going to produce enough value to make saw blades a minor consideration, it's not going in my saws. As it says on the HP home page, life's too short to cut ugly rocks. True enough, though I've found the thickness of the 16 inch blade and 20 inch blade to be about the same, I've even seen thicker 10 inch blades, but yes in general bigger blades can be thicker. I'm just thinking if specs were the same |
|
