Think Kerf Verses Full Kerf blades

[Bryan S]

I know what the differences arein the 2 different blades and why you would want to thin kerf blade on lower powered saws like removing less material so as not to work the saw as hard. What have been your experiences with using one vs the other?

I've heard things like the thin kerf is less stable will flex more and more prone to warping. The only experience I've had are with Freud full kerf combo that I picked up during an Amozon sale last year and a thin kerf Freud finishing blade I picked up from the blue Borg several years ago. The full kerf combo blade on crosscuts was like going through butter compared to the thin kerf finishing blade but a little more chip out especially in ply. It was hard to tell a difference when ripping.

I just want to decide and stay with the same kerf size blade when I get the new saw together and going. It was easy to compensate for the differences in blade width on the old craftsman but I dont know how hard it will be to cocompensate on the new one.

Your experiences and opinions are appreciated.

 

[WoodWrangler]

Full Kerf, hands down.

I had a thin kerf blade and sold it. It was a great quality blade, but the odd size is just a mess. And it's not like you can easily change it out with a regular kerf (1/8") because your fence is off, your zero-clearance insert is no longer zero-clear, and your jigs (i.e. sled) are not accurate. Plus, you always have to think (remember) the kerf is going to be different -- which impacts measurements.

Note: Watch out as some blades are "in between" on the kerf, which is even more of a mess. Like the Tenryu which uses a .111" kerf (odd size).

Personally, I use the Ridge Carbide TS2000 (http://www.holbren.com/product.php?productid=120&cat=51&page=1) and it is a top quality blade. Not as well known among the retail crowd, but a quick search and you'll see woodworkers and businesses everywhere swear by them ... and I can understand why since I upgraded mine from a Dewalt blade. The Forrest WWer II is also very good from what I hear (and will probably put one in my collection as a backup)

 

[Makinsawdust]

Bryan,
I use thin kerf's to save wood. I rip thousands of narrow strips a year out of exotic woods and I get a higher yield by using one. When I work on furniture projects and the like I switch to full kerf because of the flexing you mentioned. I use a full kerf on my cut-off tablesaw that I use to trim ends to square. I do use a stabilizer with the thin kerfs. The one negative with thin kerfs is that the Biesmeyer splitter I have only works with full kerf blades.:thumbs_do
So I guess what I'm saying is you need to customize your blade to the application.
Rob

 

[DaveO]

I generally run a TK WWII on my tablesaw, it's only 2 HP. But I do have a FK ripping blade and I see no difference in power between the two. I will probably get a FK blade the next time I decide to buy one (or get a gift). I only use a FK blade on my CMS and RAS, due to the flex issue.
Dave

 

[BobcatBob]

I have to agree with Bryan that a TK blade is good for saving wood. I feel that a stabilizer is also important to use but then that will also limit the thickness of the wood you can cut because the stabilizer will limit how high you can raise the blade.

Bob

 

[junquecol]

I only own one TK blade- I got it on a deal. I have never had any issue of lack of power on my TS's. I've had a 1.0 HP Sears, and a 2.0 HP Delta contractor's saw. Remember that Delta made a 1.5 HP Uni, and reccomended FK blades. I suspect that most of the power goes into shearing the sides of the cuts, not into removing the center. I would love to see a comparison of TK, and FK blades on the same saw, with a power feeder. Same brand, in the same condition. Use a power feeder to feed stock, so feed rate is the same. Both cuts from the same board, or the next board in a log, so as to remove the difference caused by the wood. Maybe this is one for "Myth Busters."

 

[Bas]

This gets debated a lot. Here is the general consensus - that doesn't mean it's true:
- On saws < 3HP, you should use a Thin Kerf blade
- On 3+HP saws, use a Full Kerf
- TK blades warp/ flex more
- FK blades waste more wood
- Stabilizers don't help much

I have a 1 3/4HP hybrid. My main blade is a Freud 50T Full Kerf combination blade. It does extremely well. For my previous saw (which was _seriously_ underpowered), I bought a 24T Thin Kerf ripping blade, which I actually used this weekend (after having to make a new ZCI, install the Micro Jig Thin Kerf splitter etc.). I didn't notice a difference (either better or worse), but I was ripping 6/4 SYP, not hard maple. I have not noticed any issues with the blade flexing, even under stress.

The bottom line? I don't think it matters very much most of the time. Under heavy stress, a TK blade might flex a little more. Ripping thick, hard lumber, a TK might do slightly better on an underpowered saw. Personally, I'm sticking with Full Kerf. I only have my gut feeling on this, but the cuts do seem a little more stable with a FK blade.

 

[Nativespec]

The only problem I had is on my Dewalt chop saw I could not use a thin kerf with the laser attachment.

I tend the use the full kerf. On a small circular saw I would go with the thin kerf-not much choice there.

On hand saws, the pull saws can be awful thin and I noticed some teeth missing on my razor saw. The clumsier western style are tougher, but do not cut as well.

David

 

[KC7CN]

I know what the differences arein the 2 different blades and why you would want to thin kerf blade on lower powered saws like removing less material so as not to work the saw as hard. What have been your experiences with using one vs the other?

I've heard things like the thin kerf is less stable will flex more and more prone to warping. The only experience I've had are with Freud full kerf combo that I picked up during an Amozon sale last year and a thin kerf Freud finishing blade I picked up from the blue Borg several years ago. The full kerf combo blade on crosscuts was like going through butter compared to the thin kerf finishing blade but a little more chip out especially in ply. It was hard to tell a difference when ripping.

I just want to decide and stay with the same kerf size blade when I get the new saw together and going. It was easy to compensate for the differences in blade width on the old craftsman but I dont know how hard it will be to cocompensate on the new one.

Your experiences and opinions are appreciated.

I recently purchase the Freud Avanti 80T TK to cross cut Oak veneer. I choose this blade for two reasons: 1) to see if I liked TK blades, and 2) the lower cost.

The blade does a good job cross cutting Oak - nearly perfect! With a blue tape on the backside of the veneer, I could see no tear out whatsoever!

I have decided to stay with FK blades. I have a 1-1/2HP PowerMatic 64A, and I have never had an issue with power. It is much easier to stay with one style of blade considering all the hassle to support two kerf sizes -- splitters, inserts, fence tape indicator, and all your sleds. Not to mention, I simply like the heft of a full kerf blade.

I did discover the blade on my DeWalt 10" miter saw is a thin kerf blade. The 80T Freud Avanti has a new home!

-Don