Post by arghvark on May 9, 2020 12:02:26 GMT -5
I'm sure the experts will roll their eyes and give a resounding, "duh" but I thought this was worth sharing anyway.
Punchline for those who don't want to read my ramblings: Don't f$#& with cheap blades!
When I bought my 18" saw, (old and used but in good condition) it had an inexpensive "crimped" blade. Cut well. There is a very slight misalignment that I haven't addressed, but it wasn't an issue. At first. I cut a lot of obsidian, so was just sort of assuming that would keep the blade in good shape. (A lot: several large slabs of obsidian in between each rock of harder material.)
Couple weeks ago, the saw was audibly slowing down on a couple of larger rocks. This is after maybe a couple hundred slabs, most of them not at the size capacity of the saw. Oil is (relatively) clean, I'm not sprayin' mud. My thought was that the slight misalignment was being exacerbated by a small amount of play in the carriage. I'm inexperienced, so didn't really know whether it was "bad enough" to be a problem.
After some discussion with a couple of kind and generous members here, I looked at the blade under a 10x loupe. Whoa. Really bad shape. Really bad. Intermittent "push over" and even some slots where it actually looks like the diamond has been ripped out.
Hemmed and hawed. A blade is expensive and 6 inexpensive crimped import blades can be had for the price of one "real" blade.
Bit the bullet, ordered an MK-303. This is a segmented, sintered/continuous rim blade.
WOW. Night and day.
MUCH quieter. The motor runs much cooler. If the saw is shut off mid-cut, it stops much less quickly (less pressure.) It cuts like butta. It doesn't create nearly as much mist.
Currently cutting a piece of opalized wood (not particularly hard) that is close to the size capacity of the saw. Absolutely flawless.
The new blade is considerably thicker (.067 vs .085, I believe) than the old one, but it is vastly more rigid. The old one is positively floppy in comparison. This seems to be making a BIG difference in deflection: after a cut, the gap between blade and rock is MUCH smaller than with the old blade. Literally 1/3 as much. (Yes, I still need to dink with that alignment!)
Remains to be seen whether it will cut 6 times as much rock (thinking cost per cut here) but my initial impression is that it easily will. Feeling like it was a good choice.
Punchline for those who don't want to read my ramblings: Don't f$#& with cheap blades!
When I bought my 18" saw, (old and used but in good condition) it had an inexpensive "crimped" blade. Cut well. There is a very slight misalignment that I haven't addressed, but it wasn't an issue. At first. I cut a lot of obsidian, so was just sort of assuming that would keep the blade in good shape. (A lot: several large slabs of obsidian in between each rock of harder material.)
Couple weeks ago, the saw was audibly slowing down on a couple of larger rocks. This is after maybe a couple hundred slabs, most of them not at the size capacity of the saw. Oil is (relatively) clean, I'm not sprayin' mud. My thought was that the slight misalignment was being exacerbated by a small amount of play in the carriage. I'm inexperienced, so didn't really know whether it was "bad enough" to be a problem.
After some discussion with a couple of kind and generous members here, I looked at the blade under a 10x loupe. Whoa. Really bad shape. Really bad. Intermittent "push over" and even some slots where it actually looks like the diamond has been ripped out.
Hemmed and hawed. A blade is expensive and 6 inexpensive crimped import blades can be had for the price of one "real" blade.
Bit the bullet, ordered an MK-303. This is a segmented, sintered/continuous rim blade.
WOW. Night and day.
MUCH quieter. The motor runs much cooler. If the saw is shut off mid-cut, it stops much less quickly (less pressure.) It cuts like butta. It doesn't create nearly as much mist.
Currently cutting a piece of opalized wood (not particularly hard) that is close to the size capacity of the saw. Absolutely flawless.
The new blade is considerably thicker (.067 vs .085, I believe) than the old one, but it is vastly more rigid. The old one is positively floppy in comparison. This seems to be making a BIG difference in deflection: after a cut, the gap between blade and rock is MUCH smaller than with the old blade. Literally 1/3 as much. (Yes, I still need to dink with that alignment!)
Remains to be seen whether it will cut 6 times as much rock (thinking cost per cut here) but my initial impression is that it easily will. Feeling like it was a good choice.
