Ridgid r4510 Table Saw / Forrest Woodworker II Saw Blade

[Stanley C. Pearse]

As mentioned in the title I have a Ridgid 4510 table saw and would like to order a Forrest Woodworker II blade for it.  I noticed in the Rockler catalog that there are two kerf's available....a .093 and a .125.  Does anyone see a problem with the .093 kerf?  A smaller kerf is always better...right?

Thanks as always!

Stan

[John Schaben]

"A smaller kerf is always better...right?"

 

Not necessarily, The riving knife/splitter must be thinner than the kerf and thicker than the plate to keep the stock from binding or snagging. I'd been looking at some Amana blades but the plate was to thick.  A thin kerf can also be more prone to vibration and need stabilizers. That said, I have a 4510 and a thin kerf is a good choice. I use the thin kerf Freud Fusion on mine. I haven't need stabilizers on it. The only thing I see is your riving knife/splitter needs to be dead bang on (it should be anyway) as it is also .093 thick (it's stamped on the side) so if it's out even few thousandths your stock can snag on it.

[Dean Mac Lean]

I have a Bosch table saw and bought a thin kerf blade (Freud).  Unfortunately, when cutting, the kerf was so thin that the wood would bind on the riving knife.  I ended up putting the original blade back on and no longer have any binding.  Otherwise, I have heard that thin kerf is better.

[Stanley C. Pearse]

Thank you gentlemen...@John:  I never knew that the riving knife thickness was stamped on the side...that is good to know.

 

Stan

[John Schaben]

Hi Stan - This is the first one I've ever seen that had that. Just another of several subtle things I like about this saw.

Stanley C. Pearse said:

Thank you gentlemen...@John:  I never knew that the riving knife thickness was stamped on the side...that is good to know.

 

Stan

[Jay Boutwell]

Hi Stanley, I am a big fan of Forrest saw blades near 20 years now using them exclusively in my shop.  I have found that they perform well under stressful cutting.  I use the .125 tooth finding them to last longer and give better overall performance in the cutting than the thin kerf blade.  One of the reasons for this is the actual tooth width having more carbide and metal on the cutting tooth and thus can with stand more heat generated by the cutting of the material.  True the thin kerf saves more lumber but not enough to justify the difference.

The thin kerf will benefit an under powered saw. The wider kerf will actually require more power to cut material however in the larger powered saw they perform the best.   Heat causes metal fatigue as well as the flexing of the blade during the cutting and when making rip after rip they become very hot.  The more metal the more cutting it will take to heat up the blade.  I have a couple thin kerf Forrest blades in my supply cabinet of which I most likely will not mount on the saw because of this.

The blade of my choice is a Forrest  40 tooth combination of which gives me "glue up off the saw " performance in even the toughest of woods including thoes such as hickory, oak and maples as well as the more greasy woods including several exotic woods that I use for inlay work.  They also work quite well in the mdf and  mdo man made sheets goods but since they are abrassive will take the edge off of any cutting tool it is exposed to.

In my opinion a Forrest blade is a great choice for any saw.

 

[Stanley C. Pearse]

I can see your point Jay - especially if I was using a "beefer" saw...but since I am going to be using a Ridgid r4510 (see URL below...it contains pictures at the bottom of the page) would I be safer uisng the thin kerf blade??

 

http://www.woodworkingtalk.com/f24/new-ridgid-r4510-portable-table-...

Jay Boutwell said:

Hi Stanley, I am a big fan of Forrest saw blades near 20 years now using them exclusively in my shop.  I have found that they perform well under stressful cutting.  I use the .125 tooth finding them to last longer and give better overall performance in the cutting than the thin kerf blade.  One of the reasons for this is the actual tooth width having more carbide and metal on the cutting tooth and thus can with stand more heat generated by the cutting of the material.  True the thin kerf saves more lumber but not enough to justify the difference.

The thin kerf will benefit an under powered saw. The wider kerf will actually require more power to cut material however in the larger powered saw they perform the best.   Heat causes metal fatigue as well as the flexing of the blade during the cutting and when making rip after rip they become very hot.  The more metal the more cutting it will take to heat up the blade.  I have a couple thin kerf Forrest blades in my supply cabinet of which I most likely will not mount on the saw because of this.

The blade of my choice is a Forrest  40 tooth combination of which gives me "glue up off the saw " performance in even the toughest of woods including thoes such as hickory, oak and maples as well as the more greasy woods including several exotic woods that I use for inlay work.  They also work quite well in the mdf and  mdo man made sheets goods but since they are abrassive will take the edge off of any cutting tool it is exposed to.

In my opinion a Forrest blade is a great choice for any saw.

 

[John Schaben]

Good plan Stanley. I haven't had any issues with a narrow kerf blade. I'm sure it will run a standard kerf but Freud recommends thin kerf on all universal motor saws. For these purposes they say a saw that "cannot be converted to 220V".  I also think there is a reason why Ridgid designers only allowed a 6" dado set and a max of 3/4" dado stack.

Stanley C. Pearse said:

I can see your point Jay - especially if I was using a "beefer" saw...but since I am going to be using a Ridgid r4510 (see URL below...it contains pictures at the bottom of the page) would I be safer uisng the thin kerf blade??

 

http://www.woodworkingtalk.com/f24/new-ridgid-r4510-portable-table-...

Jay Boutwell said:

Hi Stanley, I am a big fan of Forrest saw blades near 20 years now using them exclusively in my shop.  I have found that they perform well under stressful cutting.  I use the .125 tooth finding them to last longer and give better overall performance in the cutting than the thin kerf blade.  One of the reasons for this is the actual tooth width having more carbide and metal on the cutting tooth and thus can with stand more heat generated by the cutting of the material.  True the thin kerf saves more lumber but not enough to justify the difference.

The thin kerf will benefit an under powered saw. The wider kerf will actually require more power to cut material however in the larger powered saw they perform the best.   Heat causes metal fatigue as well as the flexing of the blade during the cutting and when making rip after rip they become very hot.  The more metal the more cutting it will take to heat up the blade.  I have a couple thin kerf Forrest blades in my supply cabinet of which I most likely will not mount on the saw because of this.

The blade of my choice is a Forrest  40 tooth combination of which gives me "glue up off the saw " performance in even the toughest of woods including thoes such as hickory, oak and maples as well as the more greasy woods including several exotic woods that I use for inlay work.  They also work quite well in the mdf and  mdo man made sheets goods but since they are abrassive will take the edge off of any cutting tool it is exposed to.

In my opinion a Forrest blade is a great choice for any saw.

 

[Stanley C. Pearse]

I just love this forum!!!  Thanks again Jay!!

[Jay Boutwell]

You  are most welcome Stan, I did look at the r4510 saw and noted the it is a 15 amp motor and I would say you would benifit using the thin kerf.  The reason as I already stated is the it will give you more cutting power and since it is a lighter saw than what I run.  I would think you could benifit using the thin kerf.  Since you are not pushing lumber in the capacity and as hard as I do, you do not demand as much from your saw.  What John says above i do whole heartedly agree with.  I too believe you could run the thick kerf but this opens the question as to how much do you demand from your saw.  If I was doing light work and had a saw such as you have I would lean towards the thin kerf knowing that if I push it too hard then  my saw will suffer as well as my cutting performance quality.  I guess it is like match the tool to the job thing where a guy has figure out the best approach  and not use a row boat to attempt to cross the high seas.  The Forrest thin kerf's is a good blade and I believe will suit your needs quite nicely.  My best to you, jb

Stanley C. Pearse said:

I just love this forum!!!  Thanks again Jay!!