Thanks for the insights @deema I’d love to see one in the flesh too. Going from the video I posted with the images, those castings seem to be quite substantial, but I’m a bit concerned about the parallel guides too. I’ve had too many plunge routers rack and bind on me. A lot of American contractors saws seem to be on parallel guides too. I think the Laguna fusion is on them too, but that may not be a favourable comparison. Where did you come across the manual?
Sedgwick TA 315
- Thread starter Max Brosi
- Start date
Help Support UKworkshop.co.uk:
Yeah I read that, unfortunately most if it gets far off the point. It’s reassuring to hear you say that after watching the video you think more of it. I was thinking to myself, jeez these guys must have seriously high expectations of beefiness from a saw. I’ve been working with wood since leaving school, I’m 40 now and I’ve used quite a few saws from light little scheppachs to Lazzari and altendorf panel saws but unfortunately I haven’t much experience on old cast iron cabinet saws, but my own impression was that the insides of that TS2 look reasonably solid. All the moving parts seem to be pretty substantial? To me it looked almost as solid as my AGS12, just with a different rise mechanism. Bit concerned about the parallel guides binding like on a plunge router though. Not too worried about the motors, if one ever went, it’d be straightforward enough to replace. What I like about the saw is that it seems to be a bit of the best of both worlds. The fence looks not far off a Sedgwick fence in terms of fence rail, mounting bracket, and extrusion, it has enough of a stroke to crosscut a panel, has a scoring blade, and the crosscut fence is light enough to easily remove for ripping. If you look on the Felder website they show the motor mounts/trunnions of the k500, they seem a bit weak, like on my Hammer, and to be honest the TS2 seems a lot more solid.I found this from a year odd back here on UKW.
Worth a read.
https://www.ukworkshop.co.uk/threads/record-power-ts2-sliding-table-saw.132106/
And after watching the video, it seems quite hefty and the parallel sliding mech does look better than it appears from the screen grabs.
It got a pretty good review in F&C https://www.dm-tools.co.uk/extraimages/F&C252-TS1-review.pdf
Cast iron is your friend in any machine, the more of it the better. It’s probably the best material to soak up vibration. This coupled with good design to both isolate the motor and balance the rotating parts reduces chatter and improves the cut quality. For instance, my SCM produces with a good quality blade a cut that is hard to differentiate with a machined planed surface.
I’ve attached the manual for the saw if you haven’t seen it.
The manual is disappointing from the perspective that it doesn’t give the spindle bearing part numbers, they will be standard bearings, but without the numbers it’s impossible to see how robust they are for the job. The motors are of a style that are typically generic Chinese cheap jobbies that dont have separate cap start and run. Not a big difference in price, but accountants like to count pennies. they don’t appear to be breaked and the start circuit doesn’t include a break. Not a big deal as most saws of this turning mass normally stop within the 10 second rule. Surprising though for a modern saw.
I have a Felder bandsaw, all the rest of my machines are either Sedgwick, Wadkin, or SCM. The Felder is in my opinion the worst build quality. However, it’s very good compared to most modern machines. Will it last lifetimes of use like the others? I doubt it.
SCM (say SI16) and Altendorf saws to come up regularly on auction sites, with the older versions for not much money, certainly with change left in your pocket compared to a new TS2.
I’ve attached the manual for the saw if you haven’t seen it.
The manual is disappointing from the perspective that it doesn’t give the spindle bearing part numbers, they will be standard bearings, but without the numbers it’s impossible to see how robust they are for the job. The motors are of a style that are typically generic Chinese cheap jobbies that dont have separate cap start and run. Not a big difference in price, but accountants like to count pennies. they don’t appear to be breaked and the start circuit doesn’t include a break. Not a big deal as most saws of this turning mass normally stop within the 10 second rule. Surprising though for a modern saw.
I have a Felder bandsaw, all the rest of my machines are either Sedgwick, Wadkin, or SCM. The Felder is in my opinion the worst build quality. However, it’s very good compared to most modern machines. Will it last lifetimes of use like the others? I doubt it.
SCM (say SI16) and Altendorf saws to come up regularly on auction sites, with the older versions for not much money, certainly with change left in your pocket compared to a new TS2.
Last edited:
Thank you.
Yeah, I don’t have room for something like an altendorf, and I wouldn’t want one as my only saw. At work we have a 3.2m Rolland slider and having to walk around that slider to get to the rip fence is a real pain. Great for panels, but not as a general saw imho. I’ve got an old Wadkin BZB 20 bandsaw that’s missing a rip fence and guides. I’ll be tackling it this winter. Probably using Panhans guides and I’ve already ordered a fence for it. Should be sweet then.
A BZB20 is a lovely bandsaw, huge capability, greatly undervalued in my opinion.
I totally agree with with issues of a slider and ripping. It’s a very small pool of saws that have a slider that will sit flush to the main table when not in use.
I’m not sure if the TS2 will scribe to 1200 as the throw of the slide is only a little greater. It might be the main saw will cut 1200, (4’ old money) but with the scriber it’s a little less. The SCM I have will just do 1200 with the scriber: something to check on any saw you decide upon.
I totally agree with with issues of a slider and ripping. It’s a very small pool of saws that have a slider that will sit flush to the main table when not in use.
I’m not sure if the TS2 will scribe to 1200 as the throw of the slide is only a little greater. It might be the main saw will cut 1200, (4’ old money) but with the scriber it’s a little less. The SCM I have will just do 1200 with the scriber: something to check on any saw you decide upon.
Ttrees
Iroko loco!
A used Felder perhaps ?
See them from time to time listed on our donedealsite
See them from time to time listed on our donedealsite
The trouble I see with most modern stuff, is that aluminium wears quickly if the slider is used for ripping. Far quicker to wear than cast iron. Equally old cast iron is as ‘hard as iron’ where as new cast iron seems to be a lot softer and wears far quicker. Put a few thousand feet of stuff through a modern saw and the bed lets you know it’s done work. I’ve refurbished a few SCM Si15 like my own saw (just as an example), and none of the beds show the slightest wear at all. I mean they all have shown no wear that I can discern at all. Old Wadkins can have some wear, but nothing like a ‘well’ used modern saw.
One thing I do see from some internet trawling prompted by the TS2 video:
If you look at the images of the saw mechanisms inside many of the top brand panel saws today, you will see that the blade height adjustment on most of them is done with some form of sliding mechanism, not the old style single pivot.
The better ones are bushed, and the sliding part is long to prevent any catching / juddering or lockup as it moves along a ground bar.
On at least one saw, the parallel slide mechanism is done with linear rails and linear bearing blocks which is very nice if you can keep the dust out of them.
So the TS2 is keeping good company in design terms provided they've implemented it well.
If you look at the images of the saw mechanisms inside many of the top brand panel saws today, you will see that the blade height adjustment on most of them is done with some form of sliding mechanism, not the old style single pivot.
The better ones are bushed, and the sliding part is long to prevent any catching / juddering or lockup as it moves along a ground bar.
On at least one saw, the parallel slide mechanism is done with linear rails and linear bearing blocks which is very nice if you can keep the dust out of them.
So the TS2 is keeping good company in design terms provided they've implemented it well.
Max
Sedgwick TA315 is an Excellent machine for solid wood. They used to be supplied with the sliding table as standard, since last year it became an optional extra. Sedgwick have just announced another price rise btw so hurry if your thinking about a new one as there are a few left in the system at the old price.
Thé TS 2 is a good entry level sliding table saw… better suited to sheet materials. It is made in China at the same manufacturer as the bandsaws. It is a good manufacturer who actually manufacture their own motors. It is excellent value for money and well supported. We deal with the same factory and the motors have been reliable.
Paul
@ScottandSargeant tgats really interesting, thanks. Do you know if the motors are two capacitor or single and what the main bearings size is?
I think it’s a retrograde step by Sedgwick to make the sliding table an optional extra. How much is it to buy if you want to add it to a saw?
I think it’s a retrograde step by Sedgwick to make the sliding table an optional extra. How much is it to buy if you want to add it to a saw?
Thanks Paul, that’s great to hear. The TA 315 is high on my list, the only thing worrying me about it is that the trunnion mechanism is pinned into the underside of the table and can’t be adjusted, so if the blade isn’t absolutely parallel to the mitre slots, there’s no adjustment to sort that out, making the mitre slots useless. Also the current offer on the TS2 is 3k vat included. I realise it isn’t as substantially built.
HOJ
Established Member
Not particularly relevant to the requirement regarding a 315, but I can recommend a Sedgwick for brutal service, I have a Sedgwick TA415, with the large sliding carriage, I don't use it, it takes a up lot of space, I use a chainsaw, radial arm or chop saw for cross cutting, dust extraction is pants, @deema mentioned that, even with a 100mm & 150mm extractor connections on it) but, its bullet proof for my principal needs in that I rip a lot of Oak, usually 100mm thick (it has a 150mm cutting capacity @ 90), however I also needed a saw that could deal with more refined sections and with the 415 I have to fit a smaller diameter blade with a higher tooth count, but its still an aggressive machine, so, I have invested in Laguna fusion 3, this fits in well with the space I have, has been faultless, and a bonus for me was the blade tilts to the left, away from the fence, (and it'll take a dado stack, Here, as you said, if you wish to go down that rabbit hole of opinion) down side it doesn't offer a sliding carriage, but I don't need one.
Both machines work well with solid stock, and the Laguna copes well with sheet material, but I would generally knock sheets down to more manageable if not finished sizes with a rail saw &/or on the MFT first, oh and for good measure I also use a little Kitty 419, but that's set up for a specific purpose.
Both machines work well with solid stock, and the Laguna copes well with sheet material, but I would generally knock sheets down to more manageable if not finished sizes with a rail saw &/or on the MFT first, oh and for good measure I also use a little Kitty 419, but that's set up for a specific purpose.
Maybe even the modern trade shops are thinking of machines as having a limited life, a timber yard I use has got a new sliding table saw, the old one was only six or seven years old but worn out. The other timber shop I use has machines dating back to the fifties and still going strong, we are just into a throwaway culture where solid quality is no longer held in high esteem.
Thanks for that @HOJ I’d id love to hear more about how you’re finding the Laguna in terms of stability, quality, power, how rigid the fence is etc. My needs are accurately ripping and crosscutting solid wood, cutting shoulder lines on tenons, using a tenoning jig, but also accurately squaring smaller pieces of sheet material. I’ll be breaking sheets down with a track saw too. My needs are furniture making, not joinery, so I won’t regularly be ripping 4” Oak. In your opinion, is the Laguna good enough quality and enough and saw as an only saw or is it a bit rickety and tinny? Thanks.
HOJ
Established Member
@Max Brosi , whilst I can't fault the Laguna, it serves all my needs and purposes, it's a solid machine, however it cant really be compared with a TS2, the depth of cut on the Laguna is 79mm @ 90 the TS2 is 95mm, another small niggle is not having micro adjust on the Laguna fence, yet my TA415 has it!
To be truthful, If I made "furniture" I would have looked at other alternatives, and probably gone for a slider model, my kitty 419 has a small one fitted which I use.
To be truthful, If I made "furniture" I would have looked at other alternatives, and probably gone for a slider model, my kitty 419 has a small one fitted which I use.
