I
My understanding was that the developer of the Saw-Stop system initially offered it to every saw manufacturer and they all turned it down. They thought it would add too much to the cost.
t was way more complicated than that.
Black & Decker tested the system, and found that the capacitance system would false rrip on standard construction materials, like pressure treated wood, and wet limber, and materials coated with foil, etc.
All standard construction materials, which are routinely cut on a tablesaw, especially tablesaws like B&D’s Dewalt brand made.
Apparently, the stupid f@cking patent lawyer who designed the system, was too f@cking stupid to foresee this issue, because he didn’t properly test his saw safety system.
He then couldn’t figure out how to fix the issue himself, so he hired an outside engineer to figure out a solution. (I believe the engineer specialized in capacitance)
That engineer couldn’t solve the issue, so the Sawsyop inventor sued that engineer.
The Sawstop inventor’s solution, was to build in an override, that would test if a material might trip the saw, so the saw user could deactivate the trip function.
This basically would have left a saw that supposedly had a certain safety function, without the safety function, while cutting wood were the safety function might be more needed.
Further, the override required extra steps for a user to use, meaning saw users might be more likely to leave a saw running between cuts (with the safety capacitance mode deactivated) to save time, which us inherently dangerous.
B&D likely declined the technology because the “inventor” seemed like a litigious ******, who didn’t know what he was doing.
The inventor also wanted a licensing fee that was a higher dollar amount than the average retailer made on the sale of a consumer grade saw, including Dewalt saws, and he refused to self indemnify the manufacturers against injuries from consumers using the saws.
The power tool manufacturers didn’t avoid the technology due just to price.
The power tool manufacturers avoided the technology, because it was imperfect, could lead to other safety issues, and was designed by someone who wanted way too much for a neat but highly imperfect idea.
The designed went on to serve as an “expert” witness, for lawsuits concerning tablesaws, on how his technology could have prevented injury if his technology had been included in the saw design.
When Bosch later came out with a similar safety function, that didn’t potentially damage the saw blade, or require the same expensive replacement cartridges as Sawstop, Sawstop sued to have the Bosch saw removed from the US market.
Incidentally, the Sawstop inventor didn’t invent the safety capacitance switch for blade contact, there were previous patents for that.
He also didn’t invent the dropping of the saw blade below the tabletop, there are at least two different saw designs with tables, and a blade that rises from below that already did that (the Norsaw and the rising blade chopsaw.)
