Comments on: Tenryu Gold Medal Blade

By: Steve Jaynes

Steve Jaynes — Wed, 10 Jun 2009 21:30:19 +0000

I DO use thin-kerf blades as I have no 220V available in my shop, and am limited to 1-3/4 HP motors. The thin kerf blades have been like adding 25% hp to my saws.

I recently was challenged by my local woodworking retailer, who doesn’t handle Forrest, to try the current crop of Freud blades, particularly the full-kerf Fusion 10″ and the thin-kerf Glue-Line Rip Blade.

I purchseed both, at approximately $150.00 out the door. Bad news, NEITHER performed as well as a new Forrest Woodworked II purchased the same day, for ~$95.00 using my “Rockler 15% discount coupon”.

I tried all three blades in the following saws: Jet ProShop 10″ JPS-10 w/ full-wide throat plate, Sawsmith 2000, with full-width throat-plate, and a Shopsmith Mark-V-520 with a zero-clearance throat plate. I ripped and cross-cut dozens of cuts in each saw, experimenting with White-Oak, Hemlock, MDF, Birch plywood, fir plywood, and Baltic-Birch plywood, and a few cuts in Red-Oak and Purple-Heart.

My subjective assessment was than in ALL three saws, the Forrest out ripped and out cross-cut the Freud blades. I was amazed that it slightly out performed the specialize Freud rip blade, in smoothness of cut and lack of burning for 12 FOOT long rips in Hemlock.

Even in my wife’s untrained estimates, “That Forrest Blade cuts smoother and doesn’t make the saws slow down.” Also, the Fusion blade had considerable binding and burning in the Hemlock. The Glue-Line rip blade ripped nicely, but no better than the Woodworker II.

As always, your milage WILL vary, and I don’t have a 3 HP cabinet saw to test, but I have returned the Freud blades for a refund. I’m sending my 22 YEAR OLD Woodworker-II back for sharpening . . . AGAIN, to keep as my plywood and MDF blade.

I DID NOT use my blade stiffener for these tests.

Hope my experiences are helpful to someone.

Steve Jaynes
Portland, OR

By: thewoodwhisperer

thewoodwhisperer — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 18:47:48 +0000

Doug. I was originally under the impression that this blade was full-kerf. That is was I was led to believe. When I did a little digging, I also saw that it was thicker than the vast majority of thin-kerf blades on the market. So from my perspective, it seemed like this blade was somewhere in between full and thin kerf. And since I don’t have a thin kerf splitter to experiment with, I didn’t feel comfortable recommending a blade that was thicker than the standard thin kerf splitter (at least thicker than most others on the market). So it was too tight for the full-kerf splitter, and potentially too loose for the thin kerf splitter.
This blade could very well work nicely with a thin-kerf splitter, but how much of a gap is too much? I don’t know. You don’t know. But when I have thousands of people reading my advice, I need to be on the safe side with my recommendations.

By: Doug

Doug — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 17:58:52 +0000

Sorry – still don’t see the issue with the riving knife, except to say you obviously don’t want an RK that is wider than the blade.

First of all, you are just plain wrong when you say there are industry standard for kerfs. Check out:
http://www.woodmagazine.com/wo.....Retest.pdf
In both the thick and thin categories there is considerable difference. The thinnest is 0.090 all the way up to 0.134

I’d suggest that after several sharpenings, the difference will increase. Then of course, there is blade runout. Simply put, if you ever change blades, you are going to experience some variation

2nd, RKs have even less standardization and tend to be approximate anyway. I personally use a sharkguard (http://www.leestyron.com/sharksplitter.php) made from 13 gauge steel that ends up at approx .090 after powder-coat.

As Lee points out, the deeper the RK, the less critical the RK thickness is (so long as it isn’t too thick).

What exactly is the concern? There is a 0.021 difference between the blade and my RK. The gap between the RK and the blade is approx 1/8″. Are you really saying a board is going to bind on that and kick back? Sorry, but the physics of the equation just don’t add up.

You are right that safe enough in our own shop is up to us, but I think you are chasing ghosts here. Have an RK? Check. Keep the guard on for all through cuts? Check. Got a sharp, clean blade? Check. Wear eye protection? Check. Just confirmed that my setup is safer than probably 98% of home shops? Check.

By: Iain

Iain — Fri, 30 Nov 2007 20:23:28 +0000

Hello Marc,

I just wanted to leave a little note to say thank you to you and your readers for the comments and feedback. We are paying attention and appreciate the comments.

Thanks again

Iain Goodridge
TENRYU America, Inc.
Hebron, KY

By: Steve

Steve — Mon, 29 Oct 2007 02:20:52 +0000

Marc,
I would like to point out that Tenryu makes a lot of blades with different kerfs. The selection of widths is quite limited in the gold medal blade however, if you look into the Rapid Cut Series blades you will find a much wider (LOL – pun intended) choice. There are a number of blades with kerf widths of 0.125″ – 0.126″ from which to choose. You may want to check out the RS-25550 or RS-25550-2 blades which should work with your splitter and ZCI.

By: thewoodwhisperer

thewoodwhisperer — Sun, 28 Oct 2007 22:03:58 +0000

Actually that’s not accurate Doug. Thin kerf blades are perfectly fine when paired with the appropriate thin kerf splitter and I wouldn’t hesitate to recommend that setup. The same goes for full kerf blades. The Tenryu blade, however, is neither thin kerf nor full kerf. Its somewhere in the middle. That means there is no commercially available splitter intended for that size blade. You either have a tight fit with the full kerf splitter or a loose fit with the thin kerf splitter. Neither of which is an acceptable setup in my shop and I wouldn’t be doing my job if I told you it was. Of course, we all have to make the final decision for what qualifies as “safe enough” for our shops. But with just about every other blade on the market conforming to the standard full and thin kerf sizes, I feel the Tenryu is at a severe disadvantage because of the seemingly “minor” detail in their manufacturing process.

By: Doug

Doug — Sun, 28 Oct 2007 21:47:09 +0000

I can understand not keeping the blade yourself because of the kerf issue, but to those of use for whom it isn’t an issue, what is the problem?

By that logic, you would have to recommend against every thin kerf blade ever made because it will cause the same two problems.

I’ve always used a riving knife appropriate for a thin kerf anyway. So the real question is whether I want to get a new zci or widen my thin-kerf one if I intend to stick to the blade.

By: Brad

Brad — Sun, 28 Oct 2007 03:24:23 +0000

If you are looking for a truly quieter blade you should look at the H. O. Schumacher blades.

They have a unique design to the teeth that cuts noise significantly. Look at their website for more info on their design, but it does work. I was skeptical until I got a blade at an industrial woodworking and compared it to my Forrest and Freud blades.

And the best part is that the cut quality is on par with Forrest and Freud and at about 1/2 the price.

I buy my H. O. Schumacher blades from Leitz, who are great to deal with and much more knowledgeable about cutting tools that your regular woodoworking store

By: ScoopLV

ScoopLV — Sat, 27 Oct 2007 01:16:37 +0000

I thought the kerf issue would lead to problems.

Besides, I have problems enough dimensioning stock without having to worry about mentally removing 0.14″ because mthe measurements on my saw are set up for a 1/8″ kerf.

By: Mike in St. Paul

Mike in St. Paul — Thu, 25 Oct 2007 16:12:42 +0000

Thanks for the in-depth analysis. That is great info that will really help with our buying decisions (more stuff than I ever would have even considered).

Well done, Marc!