Shopsmith Forums

Thanks for everyone's help on my previous questions. In one response, someone suggested I go straight to the 520 rather than the 510. Can someone who's used both comment on the plusses and minuses of each option?

Here's the things I know about:

• Cost: The 520 is more expensive. However, it is cheaper to upgrade direct to the 520 rather than do 500->510->520 later on.
• Fence:
  - Is wider
  - Allows more fixturing with additional t-slots
  - Accommates the magnetic "direct-read" scales
  - Has separate front and rear lock levers
  - Uses extruded rails, not tubes
  - Drops straight onto rails
• Customer Satisfaction: Seems like everyone who has upgraded to the 520 has no real complaints. But, I didn't really find anyone who raved about the 520 over the 510 either.

Some questions:

1. Does the greater fence width provide any advantages other than allowing dual t-slots on the top? Is this fence inherently more stable?
2. What advantage is there to seperate locking levers? Seems like more fiddling around. Is the fence not perfectly accurate unless I lock the front and rear in sequence as opposed to with a single lever?
3. Do the extruded rails provide greater accuracy?
4. Is there an advantage of the 510 tubular design that you don't get with the 520? I'm thinking the 520 rails look bulkier and might get in the way more. Do the 520 rails interfere any accessories like the support table or extension table brackets (to use the floating tables as outfeed tables?)
5. Looks like the 520 rails have locking knobs for the floating tables. I don't see any on the 510. Is this a problem on the 510?
6. What else justifies what the catalog says gives "better control, precision and quality performance."
7. Why would I want to upgrade from a 510 to 520 in the future? For those of you who did, what did you get for the extra $300?

Thanks for any insight!

bspisak wrote:Thanks for any insight!

I've been waiting for your question for 6 months. I didn't know how to address this subject, but you have presented a well thought out inquiry. Just the ticket for my expressions.

The 520 is an upgrade many swear by, it undoubtedly is a great tool like the 510. Essentially, the difference between the two are the table rails and the fence. I have often been astonished by reports of the superiority of the 520 over the 510. I often have to think - my 510 does that operation great! I have not yet found (read) a report of something the 520 can do better or easier. That said, the 520 is an upgrade I might buy some year. If I do- it will be because I wanted it - not because I needed it. Let's go to your post and I will comment on your post, - as truthfully as I can, with my not totally unbiased opinion.

Yes, an up-grade to 510 then to 520 will cost more than going directly to a 520.

First the Fence:

*It is wider - yes but what does that get you? Two top "T" slots and a little more beef.
*It allows more fixturing - Really? What kind of fixture requires both of these slots. The 510 fence has one and it works toward either side of the fence.
*Has separate front and rear lock levers - So? The 510 fence locks on both the front and rear also.
*Drops straight on the rails - Yes it does, but why is that an advantage? The 510 fence goes onto the front rail with the rear of the fence raised. This is not a dis-advantage.

Now the rails:
*Uses extruded rails, not tubes - The extruded, angular rail of the 520 are undoubtedly stronger than the chromed tubes of the 510. However the tubes of the 510 are strong and do not bend or stretch. Can't say how much force it would take to bend one.
*The magnetic direct reading scale - Many of the newer woodworking machines have scales Incorporated with their tool. Many woodworkers like it! I wouldn't have much use for it (I think). I prefer NOT to use measuring tapes and scales. It is my feeling that every time a measurement (little line) from a scale is transferred to wood an error is possible. That's why I prefer sticks and blocks to tapes. Yes, I have to use tapes, but keep it to a minimum. Why would I need one on my SS?

Next - Your Questions]Does the greater fence width provide any advantages other than allowing dual t-slots on the top? Is this fence inherently more stable?

Don't see any advantages with this fence. The 510 fence locks on front and rear. More Stable? The added mass of the fence, probably makes it slightly more stable, however the 510 fence, like the 520, is essentially un-movable when locked down.


[*]What advantage is there to separate locking levers? Seems like more fiddling around. Is the fence not perfectly accurate unless I lock the front and rear in sequence as opposed to with a single lever?

Separate locking front and rear are necessary for stability and no deflection. Both the 510 and the 520 should be locked in sequence. (front first) The difference here is the 510 has a screw operated clamp on front. The 520 has a lever locked clamp.


[*]Do the extruded rails provide greater accuracy?

Probably not. I don't think anyone can show greater accuracy. The tubes of the 510 are very accurate when they are aligned and tightened from the front of the saw table first (before the back). As I've read in this forum, 520 alignment can have its problems, but if installed properly they are very accurate also.


[*]Is there an advantage of the 510 tubular design that you don't get with the 520? I'm thinking the 520 rails look bulkier and might get in the way more. Do the 520 rails interfere any accessories like the support table or extension table brackets (to use the floating tables as out-feed tables?)

I wouldn't be concerned with the 520 rails getting in the way of anything. They work very good with all Shopsmith accessories.
The 510's tubular design of the rails also works perfectly with the extension tubes. The Screw locks of the 510 push the extension tubes out to the front of the tubular rails. If one tightens the front of the saw table first then works outward from there on the front, all floating tables are perfectly aligned for the rip fence.


[*]Looks like the 520 rails have locking knobs for the floating tables. I don't see any on the 510. Is this a problem on the 510?

All floating tables have locks. The 510 locks "from the inside out" and the 520 locks "from the bottom up".


[*]What else justifies what the catalog says gives "better control, precision and quality performance."

I don't know.


[*]Why would I want to upgrade from a 510 to 520 in the future? For those of you who did, what did you get for the extra $300?

Answered above - Won't need one - Might want one, just so I can have one. The money buys you new rails and a new fence.

It seems that you guys have covered the upgrade quite well. From what I hear its mutch easier to setup the 520. Its an upgrade that I want, don't need but want. The upgrade from 500 to 510 is such a great upgrade that if you don't mind spending a little bit more go to the 520 and be done.

IMHO you have made a good decision. I don't believe that you will ever regret spending the extra money once you have used the 520 for a day or two.

Chuck, I am sorry but you have made this frugal decision without harassement from anyone. However, unlike most of life's decisions, this is one that you don't have to live with. You can change your mind at any time.

Incidently, I agree with your assessment that the 510 is a fine tool to have even without the 520 upgrade. I had one for many years and I, like you, know that. It's just that I spend nearly all of my "mad money" on the shop and you must spend yours elsewhere.

You do some beautiful work without the 520 upgrade; I've seen some of your posts as evidence. That along with it being the way you want it is all the really counts.

I had both and the 520 is the only way to go. Why? ALIGNMENT!!!!!!

Perhaps it is just me but with my 510 my floating tables were either slightly higher or sligthly lower than the aux or main table. If I played around enough I could get them perfect but it was frustrating. That is because of the tube and rail and how the table tightened to the tube. It was pressure from the side. The floating table could be sitting low on the tube and if the tube was high in the rail on the main or aux table you would have a difference in height.
Also the floating table could cant on the tubes and if you placed the fence on a floating table it could be off.

Again you could adjust this out but it was a always a problem.

On the 520 the tubes are tightened from the bottom this forces the top of the rail down on the tube, in the main table, the aux table and floating table.
That means the rails of all tables is resting firmly on the tube. Since all table heights are adjusted once in relationship to the rails (done by using the guage SS sends you). This all means that every table is at the same level as the other tables. It has to be, there is nothing to adjust out or even think about. Also the way the rails and tube meet I haven't been able to cause the floating table to cant on tube. This means if I place the fence on a floating table it will be as accurate as if I had placed it on the main table.

To me the way the tables are tightened to the tube is a HUGE HUGE improvement!!!!!!!!

The second thing is the fence. With the 520 you have a fence that can set up perfectly. All adjustment is done from the top of the fence that means the screws can be loosened, the fence adjusted into perfect alignment and then locked down then the adjustment screws tightened with no chance of movement caused by having to remove the fence and tightening it from the bottom. Again a huge improvement!

The scale is fantastic but like many old timers I still tend to use the rule from the blade to the fence. Everytime I have used the rule and then checked it by measuring between the fence and the blade it has be dead on. I just need to learn to depend on it.

The fence itself is has plenty of slots so hold downs, stop guages and etc can be attached.

I also like the fact that all you have to do is flip the lever up and lift it off the machine. My 510 fence you had to spin the knob the whole way out then lift the back end to get it to piviot off the fence rail.

To me there is day and night difference between the 510 and 520 as much as there is between the 500 and 510. Personally I would like to see SS eliminate the 510 as an option and just make the one upgrade to the 520.

Thanks Ed, that's all good info. Especially the alignment issue. That may be the deciding factor for me - I can't stand futzing around with things. To me, that's been one of the biggest downsides of the SS: always having to align the tables when changing depth of cut.

It isn't obvious from the photos how the 510 tightens, but looking at the parts diagram I can see how it works now. I see how the 520 tightens from the bottom, but can't tell what the extrusion really looks like. Does anyone have a cross-section view of the 520 extrusion? I seem to remember seeing one on line, but can't seem to locate it now.

Brian

This might be what you're looking for. It was posted in January by ed reible. We had been having a discussion about where the adjustment plate was suppose to be inserted for installation/adjustment of the new rails.

https://forum.shopsmith.com/viewtopic.php?t=205

Hi,

I've had a 500, I've had a 510 and now I have two 520's, yea I upgraded both of them.

Do you have to go to the 520, no, but as for me, I love the 520's and would never ever think of having a 510 again. Yea it is that much better and for what it is worth if you ever have to sell the machine you will get top dollar for a 520...

Everyone I have ever talked to that did the upgrade say they love it and no one has ever said then decided they like the 510 so much that they went back to it (reference a 510 to 520 upgrade). Form and function at its best!

Now to throw a curve at you, some of the features of the 500 I miss. I liked using the mortising attachment on it. I miss the use of the hole in the rip fence for doing edge sanding of large circles (lathe center). I miss being able to use the side of the main table as a rip fence (actual any of the extension tables). I miss being able to off set the rip fence for sanding operations (510 still has this feature). Yea and all the attachments/fixtures/jigs I made that no longer work....... In fact I only upgraded a couple of years ago so most of the things I made I did on the 500..... Yes the 500 is still a fine machine and I'm sure a lot of people are still happy use it just as it is, heck sometimes I even think about get a third machine and leaving it as a 500.

Ed

dusty wrote:This might be what you're looking for.
https://forum.shopsmith.com/viewtopic.php?t=205

Ahhh... So the extrusion fully surrounds the tube. I had the impression that it didn't.

Thanks!

Brian

You posted earlier that you were considering an upgrade. Now may be the time, check out the latest upgrade sale.

http://www.shopsmith.com/ownersite/cata ... 5to520.htm

http://www.shopsmith.com/ownersite/cata ... ofence.htm