Talk:Circular saw

SawStop
How about SawStop Technology? Don't you think that is great material for wikipedia? http://www.sawstop.com/ --90.141.10.106 (talk) 14:51, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

Left or right handed
If a saw is classified as "Blade-Left" or "Blade-Right", then which hand is that saw for?

invented by?
I recall hearing that the circular saw was invented by the Shakers. Anybody?

The shakers claim the first circular saw in the saw mill:

http://inventors.about.com/library/inventors/bltools.htm In 1777, Samuel Miller invented the circular saw in England, the round metal disk type of saw that cuts by spinning and is used hand-held or table-mounted. Large circular saws are found in saw mills and are used to produce lumber. In 1813, Shaker-Sister, Tabitha Babbitt (1784-1854) invented the first circular saw used in a saw mill. Babbitt was working in the spinning house at the Harvard Shaker community in Massachusetts, when she decided to invent an improvement to the two-man pit saws that were being used for lumber production. Tabitha Babbitt is also credited with inventing an improved version of cut nails, a new method of making false teeth, and an improved spinning wheel head. [anonymous]
 * Reading this led me to investigate the matter further. In consequence, I have substantially amended the text.  Peterkingiron 20:55, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
 * My investigations, partly prior to the last comment, and partly since, suggest that there were much earlier saw mills, but with a straight saw, depressed by a waterwheel and returned by a whip. There is a painting of Taylor holding a typical circular saw blade, reproduced in an article that I think I cited.  I take this to be a claim of its invention.  Patenting was unusual in the 18th century, and it is not unlikely that he put the saw into use without thinking of going to the considerable expense of taking out a patent.  Peterkingiron (talk) 22:27, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I have added the 'Original research inline' template at the end of the statement "A common claim is for a little-known sailmaker named Samuel Miller of Southampton, England who obtained a patent in 1777 for a saw windmill. However, the specification for this only mentions the form of the saw incidentally, indicating that it was probably not his invention." as the second part is unsourced and has a speculative tone. –Ntmamgtw (talk) 23:14, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

Use of picture
Is it okay to use a branded picture? This is almost like an endorsement. I realize it is informational but is there no other way?--Tbeatty 08:49, 15 October 2006 (UTC)
 * I'd try to use an image that shows as little branding as possible, but it's probably OK if it's a "typical" brand or the "original" brand (i.e., of handheld, thus Skilsaw). However, anything would be better than to show a miter saw which is decidedly not a circular saw. &mdash;/M endaliv /2¢/Δ's/ 09:32, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

Why "Citation Needed" everywhere?
Is there possible controversy over the materials and technology of a circular saw? Sweavo 11:11, 10 July 2007 (UTC)


 * All archives should be fully referenced, controversial or not. Someone's gone overboard in tagging this one, but all of those tags should be replaced with real refs eventually. Chris Cunningham 11:34, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
 * it's a page isn't it? not an archive.  And Citing sources says place citations on material that is challenged or likely to be challenged, and on direct quotes.  I wouldn't like to have to insert a citation everywhere on the whole wiki that, e.g. someone asserts that a beech, oak, larch, birch, pine or yew is a tree... Sweavo 13:46, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

ideas for more info
This page appears to be the remains of a sawmill page that got reheaded. the legacy of lots of info about wood seems to bear this out, after all circular saws are used to cut stone, metal, semi-precious gems there are even even medical applications. also one of the basic observations is missing, how to differentiate between types of blade; by tpi or teeth per centimeter, the difference between cross cut and rip blades (being the size of the 'throat' or hollow before the cutting edge), what about the set of the saw? tungsten teeth or pressed? expansion slots - the ability to set depth and angle. the existence of a movable fence. bench saws and hand saws, diamond saws. and then you could get technical, what temper for the teeth and variations for different materials, speed and torque for different materials, legislation regarding safety, guards guides and how to use a saw, push sticks. the list is a long one - hence the reason that I haven't bothered to spend any time writing the page - life is tooo short and wikipedia not really for me. 81.102.245.243 (talk) 22:44, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Skill saw
"Skill saw" redirects here, but there isn't actually any information about them on this page. The "Types of Circular Saw" section says "In addition to hand-held circular saws (see below)..." but that seems to be a red-herring.

It seems like if Miter Saws, Table Saws, Radial Arm Saws, etc. get their own pages, "Skill saw" (or whatever term is most appropriate) deserves one too, but at the very least there should be some info on this page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by JPrice (talk • contribs) 13:31, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Conventional circular saw?
The caption with the first photo is "A hand-held circular saw is the most conventional circular saw", but isn't a sawmill the most conventional circular saw? The circular saw being a substantial advancement or improvement to the basic 'saw with a circular blade', - which is a sawmill. Wilke339 (talk) 21:49, 25 March 2018 (UTC) wilke339, 3/25/18.
 * Agreed. A modern handheld circular is probably the best choice as a masthead image, but a history section should include the simplest belt or lineshaft-driven saw we can find, and a very large old sawmill saw. Andy Dingley (talk) 09:56, 26 March 2018 (UTC)