Newb with SS questions - part 2 - SS as Table Saw

Forum for people who are new to woodworking. Feel free to ask questions or contribute.

Moderators: HopefulSSer, admin

User avatar
Ed in Tampa
Platinum Member
Posts: 5826
Joined: Fri Jul 21, 2006 12:45 am
Location: North Tampa Bay area Florida

Re: Newb with SS questions - part 2 - SS as Table Saw

Post by Ed in Tampa »

dusty wrote: Sat Feb 06, 2021 1:25 pm
Ed in Tampa wrote: Sat Feb 06, 2021 12:02 pm Frankly if you believe a table saw is the main tool in a work shop , and I am not saying you do, buy a table saw! At best the SS is a compromise. You will find trying to use the jigs and fixtures you often see on TV, YouTube or in magazines probably will not work as shown. If you are trying to copy techniques or use add on accessories they probably will not fit or work.

However if you have limited space and just plan to use the SS to cut to size then yes the SS will work.

My opinion do not consider the 510, either get an old 500 or wait to you find a 520. I have owned all three and I believe the 510 was a disaster and should have never went to market. Frankly the 500 was very efficient, excellently designed and did almost everything I wanted. I think ad hype convinced me to move up to the 510 and 520 but the fact is the 500 in my opinion is superior.

Looking back at my expenditures I would have been MOST happy and better served had I kept my 500 as it was an excellent machine and also bought a standalone table saw using the money I spent upgrading to the near useless 510 and the later a much improved 520.

If you can't tell I hated the 510 and would have never bought had I known how poorly it performed.
You continue to make these statements so I shall continue to counter. There was nothing wrong with your 510 that could not have been corrected if you had been willing to do whatever was needed to set it up correctly and use it properly. You'll never convince me that you did not have a user error issue. You complain about the excessive table movement that was present. If that really existed, something wasn't tight or was broken. The carriage lock and tilt lock are key suspects. Design is not problem. If it was, mine would not be stable and it is.
Dusty if the 510 was any good SS would have never gone to the 520 AND STOPPED SELLING the 510. All the problems you listed would still exist on the 520 had something other than design flaws had been the problem. The 510 upgrade should never gone to market.
And I think you are the one that can not extension tables to be used at either end of your 510 machine. While my extension tables work fine at either end and if that is user error I will take it.

Think about it any design that locks something in a vertical plane by tightening perpendicular to that plane and against a round surface is a bad design. The 520 locks the connectors by tightening against the bottom and in same plane as the desired adjustment. You may not like hearing that but it is fact.
edma194
Platinum Member
Posts: 1874
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2020 4:08 pm

Re: Newb with SS questions - part 2 - SS as Table Saw

Post by edma194 »

There is no question that the 520 and Mark 7 have the best table and fence system on Shopsmiths.

That doesn't make 510s useless. The tables on the 510 don't align as easily as on the 520 and aren't quite as sturdily locked. I haven't used a 520 fence but I'm sure it's smoother operating on the aluminum extrusion rails than the 510 fence is.

I started with a Model 500 though. It was a perfectly fine table saw, but the table was small and it had an older low power motor. But upgrading to a 510 from the 500 was a tremendous improvement. The difference between the 510 and the 520 is a matter of perspective. Your experience with either and with other tables saws may make that difference a minor one. Or like my esteemed associate also named Ed, that difference could seem like an unbridgeable chasm.
Ed from Rhode Island

510 PowerPro Double Tilt:Greenie PowerPro Drill Press:500 Sanding Shorty w/Belt&Strip Sanders
Super Sawsmith 2000:Scroll Saw w/Stand:Joint-Matic:Power Station:Power Stand:Bandsaw:Joiner:Jigsaw
1961 Goldie:1960 Sawsmith RAS:10ER
User avatar
dusty
Platinum Member
Posts: 21358
Joined: Wed Nov 22, 2006 6:52 am
Location: Tucson (Wildcat Country), Arizona

Re: Newb with SS questions - part 2 - SS as Table Saw

Post by dusty »

Ed in Tampa wrote: Sun Feb 07, 2021 10:16 am
dusty wrote: Sat Feb 06, 2021 1:25 pm
Ed in Tampa wrote: Sat Feb 06, 2021 12:02 pm Frankly if you believe a table saw is the main tool in a work shop , and I am not saying you do, buy a table saw! At best the SS is a compromise. You will find trying to use the jigs and fixtures you often see on TV, YouTube or in magazines probably will not work as shown. If you are trying to copy techniques or use add on accessories they probably will not fit or work.

However if you have limited space and just plan to use the SS to cut to size then yes the SS will work.

My opinion do not consider the 510, either get an old 500 or wait to you find a 520. I have owned all three and I believe the 510 was a disaster and should have never went to market. Frankly the 500 was very efficient, excellently designed and did almost everything I wanted. I think ad hype convinced me to move up to the 510 and 520 but the fact is the 500 in my opinion is superior.

Looking back at my expenditures I would have been MOST happy and better served had I kept my 500 as it was an excellent machine and also bought a standalone table saw using the money I spent upgrading to the near useless 510 and the later a much improved 520.

If you can't tell I hated the 510 and would have never bought had I known how poorly it performed.
You continue to make these statements so I shall continue to counter. There was nothing wrong with your 510 that could not have been corrected if you had been willing to do whatever was needed to set it up correctly and use it properly. You'll never convince me that you did not have a user error issue. You complain about the excessive table movement that was present. If that really existed, something wasn't tight or was broken. The carriage lock and tilt lock are key suspects. Design is not problem. If it was, mine would not be stable and it is.
Dusty if the 510 was any good SS would have never gone to the 520 AND STOPPED SELLING the 510. All the problems you listed would still exist on the 520 had something other than design flaws had been the problem. The 510 upgrade should never gone to market.
And I think you are the one that can not extension tables to be used at either end of your 510 machine. While my extension tables work fine at either end and if that is user error I will take it.

Think about it any design that locks something in a vertical plane by tightening perpendicular to that plane and against a round surface is a bad design. The 520 locks the connectors by tightening against the bottom and in same plane as the desired adjustment. You may not like hearing that but it is fact.
You are hung up on your negative opinion about the 510. Think carefully now. The 510 and the 520 and the Mark 7 all utilize the SAME TABLE SYSTEM and the same carriage. The big difference between all of these is the "FENCE SYSTEM" not the table.

The fences contribute NOTHING to your complaints about instability. So, you tell me what is in common.
"Making Sawdust Safely"
Dusty
Sent from my Dell XPS using Firefox.
BigChip
Silver Member
Posts: 8
Joined: Thu Feb 04, 2021 12:22 am

Re: Newb with SS questions - part 2 - SS as Table Saw

Post by BigChip »

I guess now my dilemma is waiting to see what comes up first, and local to me. A good deal on a Table Saw or a good deal on a used ShopSmith. No WAY do I want to pay $2k for one...
User avatar
chapmanruss
Platinum Member
Posts: 3448
Joined: Tue Aug 26, 2014 8:16 pm
Location: near Portland, Oregon

Re: Newb with SS questions - part 2 - SS as Table Saw

Post by chapmanruss »

BigChip,

As you can see sometimes the debate can get a little "lively" here on the Forum. Dusty is correct about the differences of the 510, 505, 520 and Mark 7 Table Systems. The difference between them is the fence and rails. The table and carriage parts are the same. Ed pointed out that the Mark V 510 had been discontinued which is true. It was discontinued near the end of 2019. I don't believe it was because of any "design flaws" as suggested but simply a decrease in demand. The Mark V 505 and even the Mark V 500 had previously been discontinued. If in the future the demand decreases enough the Mark V 520 could be discontinued too. That would leave the Mark 7 which currently sells for $395.00 more than the Mark V 520 the remaining model. I believe it is these relatively small cost differences between the models that has prompted buyers to go for the improved model leaving little interest in the previous models not worth Shopsmith carrying them any longer. At this point Shopsmith no longer makes replacement parts for the Mark V 500 original table system so once all the remaining stock is gone owners will have to go to the used market or upgrade their tool. There are upgrades like the Model 500 Rip Fence Upgrade that Shopsmith still sells.

To believe that there were design flaws in the Mark V 510/505 Table System that were corrected with the Mark V 520 than any Mark V 510 or 505 made after that introduction in 1999 would not have that design flaw. The difference between a Mark V 520, 510 or 505 made in say 2001would simply be the rails and fence installed on that tool except the 505 would not include the floating tables, connector tubes or legs. All other table/carriage system parts would be the same. There was a change in the fence rails of the 510/505 after the first year in how they mounted. It is easy to tell the difference as the original 510/505 fence rails had holes through them for the mounting bolts. The later rails had threaded studs attached to the rail tubes.

In all honesty, I have not used a Model 510 but do own a Mark V 505. It has been upgraded to the Mark V 520/Mark 7 table system and I never used it as a Mark V 505. I have never tried to align a Mark V 510 or 505 fence and rails. I have not had any trouble aligning my 520/M7 table and fence. Before any changes to upgrade them my Mark V 520 is actually about 4 and 1/2 years older than my Mark V 505.
Russ

Mark V completely upgraded to Mark 7
Mark V 520
All SPT's & 2 Power Stations
Model 10ER S/N R64000 first one I restored on bench w/ metal ends & retractable casters.
Has Speed Changer, 4E Jointer, Jig Saw with lamp, a complete set of original accessories & much more.
Model 10E's S/N's 1076 & 1077 oldest ones I have restored. Mark 2 S/N 85959 restored. Others to be restored.
DLB
Platinum Member
Posts: 1984
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2019 11:24 am
Location: Joshua Texas

Re: Newb with SS questions - part 2 - SS as Table Saw

Post by DLB »

chapmanruss wrote: Sun Feb 07, 2021 1:16 pm ...The table and carriage parts are the same...
While that is true, there are at least two versions of the 510/520 carriage. Let's call them early and late. The late version has a split in the casting where the table legs go through, allowing greater clamping effectivity for any given clamping force, therefore more table stability when 'locked.' The early version is certainly more common on factory 510's. There are also at least two versions of the table itself, same thing applies, you are unlikely to encounter the early table on a factory 520. Similarly (or not) I've read here of issues that some users had with the effectiveness of 510/520 table trunnion clamping that I'm not sure were resolved. And I agree with Ed's (in Tampa) point above regarding the connector tubes. Any of these could cause a person to conclude that they did not like the specific 510 they encountered and liked the 520 better. There is that whole thing about mounting hole diameter in early (510) rear trunnions leading to alignment challenges. There are probably more examples. (Is the one-piece spindle version two bearing quill an improvement?)

While most of this is not inherent to 510 Vs 520 (except the connector tubes) I think it is fair to say that Marks made later in the production cycle may have refinements not present in earlier versions. Shopsmith does not always publish or draw attention to these changes and neither they, nor their purpose, are always obvious. All of the improvements are compatible, but not many owners are making all these changes.

- David
User avatar
Ed in Tampa
Platinum Member
Posts: 5826
Joined: Fri Jul 21, 2006 12:45 am
Location: North Tampa Bay area Florida

Re: Newb with SS questions - part 2 - SS as Table Saw

Post by Ed in Tampa »

dusty wrote: Sun Feb 07, 2021 11:02 am
Ed in Tampa wrote: Sun Feb 07, 2021 10:16 am
dusty wrote: Sat Feb 06, 2021 1:25 pm

You continue to make these statements so I shall continue to counter. There was nothing wrong with your 510 that could not have been corrected if you had been willing to do whatever was needed to set it up correctly and use it properly. You'll never convince me that you did not have a user error issue. You complain about the excessive table movement that was present. If that really existed, something wasn't tight or was broken. The carriage lock and tilt lock are key suspects. Design is not problem. If it was, mine would not be stable and it is.
Dusty if the 510 was any good SS would have never gone to the 520 AND STOPPED SELLING the 510. All the problems you listed would still exist on the 520 had something other than design flaws had been the problem. The 510 upgrade should never gone to market.
And I think you are the one that can not extension tables to be used at either end of your 510 machine. While my extension tables work fine at either end and if that is user error I will take it.

Think about it any design that locks something in a vertical plane by tightening perpendicular to that plane and against a round surface is a bad design. The 520 locks the connectors by tightening against the bottom and in same plane as the desired adjustment. You may not like hearing that but it is fact.
You are hung up on your negative opinion about the 510. Think carefully now. The 510 and the 520 and the Mark 7 all utilize the SAME TABLE SYSTEM and the same carriage. The big difference between all of these is the "FENCE SYSTEM" not the table.

The fences contribute NOTHING to your complaints about instability. So, you tell me what is in common.
Actually dusty I prefer the 510 fence to the 520. In my opinion the screw tightening method is superior to the push levers. And you are right there are many similarities between the 510 and the 520 and most of them show a severe reduction in quality when compared to the 500. I used my 500 almost daily, upgraded to the 510 and hated it, refused to use it for at least 10 years, upgraded to the 520 and liked it enough to use it about once or twice a month now. Problem these days is the older I get the more I forget to tighten a lock or I catch myself making dumb mistakes. No harm no foul but i tend to use more easier to setup methods now. I find stationary machines are easier to setup job to job. That means I am less likely to forget a lock and I believe I am safer. I would never recommend a Shopsmith over standalone machines provided there is room to house them. Just my opinion!
RFGuy
Platinum Member
Posts: 2740
Joined: Mon Dec 31, 2018 8:05 am
Location: a suburb of PHX, AZ

Re: Newb with SS questions - part 2 - SS as Table Saw

Post by RFGuy »

Ed in Tampa wrote: Mon Feb 08, 2021 10:34 am Actually dusty I prefer the 510 fence to the 520. In my opinion the screw tightening method is superior to the push levers. And you are right there are many similarities between the 510 and the 520 and most of them show a severe reduction in quality when compared to the 500. I used my 500 almost daily, upgraded to the 510 and hated it, refused to use it for at least 10 years, upgraded to the 520 and liked it enough to use it about once or twice a month now. Problem these days is the older I get the more I forget to tighten a lock or I catch myself making dumb mistakes. No harm no foul but i tend to use more easier to setup methods now. I find stationary machines are easier to setup job to job. That means I am less likely to forget a lock and I believe I am safer. I would never recommend a Shopsmith over standalone machines provided there is room to house them. Just my opinion!
I think it really comes down to personal preference. I have never had a chance to use a 500, but I know I have a strong preference for the 520 over the 510 fence. Others prefer the 510 over the 520. Some may even prefer the 500 over 510/520. I agree with you that if you have the room it is better to have standalone equipment. One day, if I get a bigger shop, that is what I intend to do. Some disagree with this, but that is their preference as well. When it comes to tools everyone has ones they like or dislike. No one tool is going to please everyone. ;)
📶RF Guy

Mark V 520 (Bought New '98) | 4" jointer | 6" beltsander | 12" planer | bandsaw | router table | speed reducer | univ. tool rest
Porter Cable 12" Compound Miter Saw | Rikon 8" Low Speed Bench Grinder w/CBN wheels | Jessem Clear-Cut TS™ Stock Guides
Festool (Emerald): DF 500 Q | RO 150 FEQ | OF 1400 EQ | TS 55 REQ | CT 26 E
DC3300 | Shopvac w/ClearVue CV06 Mini Cyclone | JDS AirTech 2000 | Sundstrom PAPR | Dylos DC1100 Pro particulate monitor
User avatar
dusty
Platinum Member
Posts: 21358
Joined: Wed Nov 22, 2006 6:52 am
Location: Tucson (Wildcat Country), Arizona

Re: Newb with SS questions - part 2 - SS as Table Saw

Post by dusty »

RFGuy wrote: Mon Feb 08, 2021 10:56 am
Ed in Tampa wrote: Mon Feb 08, 2021 10:34 am Actually dusty I prefer the 510 fence to the 520. In my opinion the screw tightening method is superior to the push levers. And you are right there are many similarities between the 510 and the 520 and most of them show a severe reduction in quality when compared to the 500. I used my 500 almost daily, upgraded to the 510 and hated it, refused to use it for at least 10 years, upgraded to the 520 and liked it enough to use it about once or twice a month now. Problem these days is the older I get the more I forget to tighten a lock or I catch myself making dumb mistakes. No harm no foul but i tend to use more easier to setup methods now. I find stationary machines are easier to setup job to job. That means I am less likely to forget a lock and I believe I am safer. I would never recommend a Shopsmith over standalone machines provided there is room to house them. Just my opinion!
I think it really comes down to personal preference. I have never had a chance to use a 500, but I know I have a strong preference for the 520 over the 510 fence. Others prefer the 510 over the 520. Some may even prefer the 500 over 510/520. I agree with you that if you have the room it is better to have standalone equipment. One day, if I get a bigger shop, that is what I intend to do. Some disagree with this, but that is their preference as well. When it comes to tools everyone has ones they like or dislike. No one tool is going to please everyone. ;)
I would agree with you on that point. Given adequate shop size to set up properly and use safely, I too would prefer standalones. But that is not what this discussion has been about. It has been about the perceived inadequacies of the Shopsmith Mark V Model 510 (primarily with regard to table instability)..

I won't comment on the comparison of the 500 to the 510 because I have not used a 500 enough to have an opinion.
"Making Sawdust Safely"
Dusty
Sent from my Dell XPS using Firefox.
DLB
Platinum Member
Posts: 1984
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2019 11:24 am
Location: Joshua Texas

Re: Newb with SS questions - part 2 - SS as Table Saw

Post by DLB »

I'll add the 520 rail alignment jigs to my previous list of differences and refinements between 510 and 520. These jigs provide an alignment standard to ensure the proper relationship between the rails and the tables they are bolted to. I don't think there is a 510 equivalent and don't believe that if I make one in my shop that I can produce it with similar tolerances and accuracy.

- David
Post Reply