Concerning Table saw upgrades, I have a question

[wiredone]

I bought my first mark 5 in 84, brand new. I sold it years later when I started to fill up a shop with stand alone tools.
Having grown up in a shop that was fully equipped with a Unisaw, I was always disappointed with the tablesaw function of the Shopsmith.
Well years later, I'm back to Shopsmith and now I see there are several saw table upgrades available.
Can/would anyone help out with their opinions on these before I pony up the bucks for a used upgrade? Is there a big difference between the 510 and the 520?
Anyone have the super big motor? can you really tell the difference?
I have upgraded the quill already to the 2 bearing design. Much less runout on the drill chuck. My current used Mark 5 is also a 1984.
I've also got an 10ER and just purchased an E but haven't pick it up yet.
I don't do that much woodwork anymore, so would like to sell my dedicated tablesaw to pay for the upgrade, if it's worth it. The space is tight and the Shopsmith fits my needs.
What say you guys and gals?
Thanks in advance.

[pennview]

Here's a recent thread on this same subject that likely will answer your question -- https://forum.shopsmith.com/viewtopic.php?t=8557 --. My view on this issue is to keep the table saw, but if you're without adequate space for both, then perhaps a upgrade table is the answer. A mobile base for the table saw is another possibility.

[damagi]

I bought my first mark 5 in 84, brand new. I sold it years later when I started to fill up a shop with stand alone tools.
Having grown up in a shop that was fully equipped with a Unisaw, I was always disappointed with the tablesaw function of the Shopsmith.
Well years later, I'm back to Shopsmith and now I see there are several saw table upgrades available.
Can/would anyone help out with their opinions on these before I pony up the bucks for a used upgrade? Is there a big difference between the 510 and the 520?
Anyone have the super big motor? can you really tell the difference?
I have upgraded the quill already to the 2 bearing design. Much less runout on the drill chuck. My current used Mark 5 is also a 1984.
I've also got an 10ER and just purchased an E but haven't pick it up yet.
I don't do that much woodwork anymore, so would like to sell my dedicated tablesaw to pay for the upgrade, if it's worth it. The space is tight and the Shopsmith fits my needs.
What say you guys and gals?
Thanks in advance.

The biggest difference between the 510 and 520 is the fence. 510 has a single slot on the top, while the 520 has two on the top and one on each side.

Both use the same larger tale, have floating tables, and can be configured in a variety of ways. Its debatable whether the 520's rails are signicantly better than the 510s rails.

In terms of the powerpro - so far I like it, but I probably wouldn't shell out the cash for it if things were different. I definitely do like the fact that the motor doesn't seem to be tripping my circuit breaker under load, which was a common problem for me with my standard headstock.

[Ed in Tampa]

The biggest difference between the 510 and 520 is the fence. 510 has a single slot on the top, while the 520 has two on the top and one on each side.

I disagree to me the biggest difference is how the floating tables and aux table is aligned to the main table.
On the 510 the floating table was held to the main table with a connector tube. You tigthen the connector tube with knurled nuts from the side. The table could align up or down and was almost impossible or at least a big pain in the butt to get aligned.

On the 520 everything is the same except the you tighten the connector tube by wing nut from the bottom. The tables are pushed down on to the tube constantly. Adjust the table fence rail so all tables are at the same height when pushed down on the connector tube and the adjustment is set forever and is easily repeatable.

When i first got my 510 upgrade I was so angry with the connector tube setup I didn't bother with my SS for years. It was only after I saw this improvement in the 520 that I started using the SS again.

Knowing what I know about both the 510 and 520 I would either stay with the 500 and not upgrade or I would go to the 520. There is no way I would ever ever consider a 510 again.

[dusty]

I find it very interesting how these opinions differ so much from one user to the next.

Yes, I prefer the 520 setup but I do not find the 510 to be all that bad. In fact, the 510 setup work essentially the same while using different hardware.

One point that I notice: Many users seem to rely on the extension tubes to achieve and maintain table alignment. I do not believe that is their function.

I believe the extension tube is meant to provide table to table stability. Yes, if not properly aligned, the tubes cannot be installed. So...align the tables.

[Ed in Tampa]

I find it very interesting how these opinions differ so much from one user to the next.

Yes, I prefer the 520 setup but I do not find the 510 to be all that bad. In fact, the 510 setup work essentially the same while using different hardware.

One point that I notice: Many users seem to rely on the extension tubes to achieve and maintain table alignment. I do not believe that is their function.

I believe the extension tube is meant to provide table to table stability. Yes, if not properly aligned, the tubes cannot be installed. So...align the tables.

How do you align floating tables if you don't rely on connector tubes?

[dusty]

How do you align floating tables if you don't rely on connector tubes?

The floating tables are really not adjustable. The rails can be moved some (thus changing position) but that is not really an adjustment; it is an assembly procedure. Once done, it should be final. You get what you get.

I do that with the floating table and the main table upside down on the work bench. The bench establishes the reference surface for the tables. I then use a block of wood that I have tailored to space the rails a specific (and consistent) distance off the bench top.

PS
I just went out to the shop and checked my "alignment tool". It is marked .350" +- .002". My notes say the space should be 11/32". These are my numbers. You won't find them referenced in Shopsmith documentation.

[BigSky]

Why do you get to establish the alignment standards. Should that not be done by Shopsmith?

[dusty]

Why do you get to establish the alignment standards. Should that not be done by Shopsmith?

I am sorry. I did not mean to sound like I was setting a standard. That is just the way I have come to do this setup. It works for me.

Shopsmith has established a procedure that you can view on the Sawdust Sessions (Shopsmith web site).

[Ed in Tampa]

[quote="dusty"]The floating tables are really not adjustable. The rails can be moved some (thus changing position) but that is not really an adjustment]

Dusty
On my machine what you call an assembly procedure in the first paragraph produced as much as 1/4" difference in table heights for me. When using two floaters and considering the main table and aux table I had at least 8 assembly procedure points that had to be checked and double checked to insure they were all the same. If i messed up and got the side tightening shaft below the center line of the connecting tube and bumped the machine it could drop to above the center line droping the table surface 1/16 - 1/8 inch.

With the 520 I don't have to do any of this once the fence rail is set to the table with the SS supplied guage which is done once on installation. All I have to do is slide the connector tube into my main fence rail, slide on the aux table and install the aux table and I know every table top will be at exactly the same height and in the same plane.

I would never never never never never own another 510. I would upgrade it in a New York minute. Incidentally I actually liked the 510 fence better than the 520 but to me they both do what I ask of them.

My ideal machine would be a 520 with a 510 fence.