Forrest Woodworker II not performing

  • Advertise with us

« back to Power Tools, Hardware and Accessories forum

Forum topic by MrDan posted 08-29-2011 01:07 AM 1963 views 0 times favorited 20 replies Add to Favorites Watch
View MrDan's profile


209 posts in 3925 days

08-29-2011 01:07 AM

Topic tags/keywords: forrest wwii woodworker ii table saw blade thin kerf tablesaw

Hello all,

I finally saved enough pennies to buy the coveted Forrest Woodworker II (thin kerf) and I have to say I’m extremely disappointed.

Let me preface this by telling a brief story:

I picked up a Forrest Woodworker I from a flea market one day for $2. It was covered in pitch and amongst a ton of really crappy blades. (A diamond in the rough if you will) I figured for $2 it was worth it even if I had to replace a few carbide teeth and get the whole thing sharpened I’d still come out ahead.

So I took it home, cleaned off the pitch and made a few test cuts (rip cuts to be exact). The results were PHENOMENAL. (It was dull and 7 of the carbide teeth had small chips in them) Now, granted I had to use more force than normal to push the wood through the cut due the the teeth being dull, and I got a touch of burning on the edge—but the cut was like glass. No saw marks at all—and this is a WWI, which is not even supposed to be as good for ripping as a WWII.

So I was sold on Forrest from that moment on. A true believer.

Anyways yesterday I installed the recently purchased WWII and the results I got were NOTHING like the results from the dull WWI. Saw marks all along the ripped edge—it looked like the results from my thin kerf ryobi blade which I always had to touch up on the jointer due to the saw marks.

The first few cuts were without the recommended blade stabilizer, so I figured that was the problem and installed it next to the blade. The results with the stabilizer? WORSE. Even more saw marks along the ripped edge.

The only thing I can think of is that maybe the difference is the width of the blade. The dull WWI that I used was full kerf. I’m not sure why that would be better, as my table saw was designed for thin kerf…but maybe there’s just less vibration.

Anyway, I’m calling Forrest tomorrow to see what they say, but in the meantime I thought I’d ask anyone here if they have had any similar issues.

Thanks for any thoughts you might have on the issue.

20 replies so far

View CharlieM1958's profile


16284 posts in 4856 days

#1 posted 08-29-2011 01:33 AM

I use a regular kerf WWII, and it cuts beautifully. I don’t have any experience with the thin kerf model, but I can’t believe it would be that bad, unless you just got a lemon.

Keep us posted on what they say. I’m curious as to how it turns out.

-- Charlie M. "Woodworking - patience = firewood"

View Chelios's profile


568 posts in 3703 days

#2 posted 08-29-2011 01:48 AM

I use regular kerf on the WW2 and I also get very nice cuts as well

View Fuzzy's profile


298 posts in 4626 days

#3 posted 08-29-2011 02:06 AM

I think the Quality Control at Forrest has gone WAY down since the old man dies … now, we’ll see if their Customer Service has survived !!! I’ve heard more complaints about them in the last 6 months than I’ve heard in the last 10 years … let’s hope they’ll make it right.

-- - dabbling in sarcasm is foolish … if you’re not proficient at it, you end up looking stupid … ... ...

View Howie's profile


2656 posts in 3560 days

#4 posted 08-29-2011 02:10 AM

Have you checked the run out on the blade? Maybe there is a tooth alignment issue? Like Charlie said,maybe you got a lemon.

-- Life is good.

View StephenO's profile


44 posts in 3183 days

#5 posted 08-29-2011 02:36 AM

I have a thin kerf WWII and get great cuts with it. Tried a stabilizer, but took it back off as it made no difference at all.

-- -Steve, Seattle

View ajosephg's profile


1882 posts in 4198 days

#6 posted 08-29-2011 02:43 AM

I think it could be a blade alignment problem, which will be worse using a thin kerf blade.

-- Joe

View Tennwood's profile


112 posts in 3819 days

#7 posted 08-29-2011 03:09 AM

I have the thin kerf WWII and not had any problems with it. I still need to get the stabilizer, but have not seen any wobble or notice any vibration. If Forrest does not have any solution, I agree with Joe that it may be an alignment issue.

As as side note, Forrest has a sharpening service that can get your WWI back to new.

-- Jim, SE Tennessee, "Don't spare the kindling Dear, we have plenty"

View MrDan's profile


209 posts in 3925 days

#8 posted 08-29-2011 03:10 AM

Hey guys,
Howie: Yeah, I did check the run out and I”m only getting .003” with the tk WWII. I checked the fk WWI for comparison and I’m getting .002” with that one.

ajosephg: I also checked the alignment of the fence to the blade and it tested out fine. I did that a few times and now I’m just going through the process of resetting the fence to the blade from scratch just to make double sure it’s not that.

I will keep everyone posted on what Forrest says tomorrow.

View MrDan's profile


209 posts in 3925 days

#9 posted 08-29-2011 03:14 AM

Tennwood, yeah I’ve been wanting to send the WWI to them, but I just spent all my blade allowance on this new WWII. At some point though I will definitely send in the WWI for rehab.

View Cosmicsniper's profile


2202 posts in 3796 days

#10 posted 08-29-2011 03:53 AM

Strange, but I haven’t been pleased with mine either…mine is full kerf, though. At first, I discovered it was because my fence was slightly misaligned, pinching into the blade. But once I fixed that, it still wants to burn the wood quite a bit. It also lifts thinner boards as I push it through. Now, I have just chalked this up to the nature of a full kerf blade (I’d only used thin kerf Freud blades beforehand), so I just assumed this was what I could expect from it, but now you have me very puzzled.

I think I’ll send mine in as well, with a voiced complaint. It should perform better than it does.

-- jay,

View ajosephg's profile


1882 posts in 4198 days

#11 posted 08-29-2011 05:28 AM

I don’t know what kind of saw you have, but if you have a cheapo contractor saw (as I do) alignment can be harder to achieve than you might realize.

For several years I THOUGHT I had it aligned within 0.005. Then one day I was playing around, and found that raising or lowering the blade with the blade lock on changes the alignment. So – now I set the blade height, tighten the lock, check the alignment. If it is off, I can change it (plus or minus) just by slightly raising or lowering the blade (1/8 turn or less usually does it) with the lock on. As a result, I try to set blade high enough so that I don’t have to mess with it often.

Before I discovered this I was having a similar problem with my rip blade, but not all of the time. I had it sharpened, same problem. Oddly enough a combination blade made smoother cuts than the rip blade. After I adjusted it as described above, the cut quality is consistently glue line ready.

-- Joe

View Loren's profile


10477 posts in 4285 days

#12 posted 08-29-2011 06:49 AM

How much blade are you running proud of the top of the wood
you are cutting with the WWII?

...and also to build on Joseph’s comment: you may have something
going on with your saw at the particular height you are running the
rip blade at.

View MrDan's profile


209 posts in 3925 days

#13 posted 08-29-2011 09:02 AM

That’s interesting Joe, thanks for the suggestion, I’ll have to investigate that one. My saw is Ryobi BT3000, granted not the best saw on the market, but it’s highly adjustable (unlike other saws in it’s class and it has a riving knife which I love). The many adjustments required to get it all dialed in is why some people dislike it, but I have tuned it to what I think is a very accurate machine. And it’s tiny motor has a lot of power, I have yet to have a situation where I felt the saw was limiting my ability to do any task, so I’m thoroughly satisfied with it. However…if there is something going on like you mention, then all bets are off. I’ll have a look-see and report back.

Loren, I usually run the saw about 1” to 1 1/4” or so above the work piece. I’ll try at different heights to see if that helps. Thanks.

And to be clear, the cuts aren’t HORRIBLE or anything, they are just not at all what I got from the dull, chipped tooth WWI, so I was expecting at least those same results if not better. Maybe I’m asking too much? I don’t know, but if this is how it’s supposed to cut, then I don’t see what all the rave is about and I definitely would not be gluing any ripped pieces without jointing them first. Certainly not “smooth as sanded” like is advertised.

When those of you who say yours works beautifully, do you mean you’re getting “smooth as sanded” or just “pretty good?” Do you get the glass like cut that I got from the dull WWI?

View Howie's profile


2656 posts in 3560 days

#14 posted 08-29-2011 01:23 PM

@MrDan…do you know anyone that you can take your blade and run it on their saw and see what the results are?

-- Life is good.

View agallant's profile


551 posts in 3524 days

#15 posted 08-29-2011 06:14 PM

I am not a huge fan of the WWII, I have a thin kerf 40t blade. But I am leaning twards it is your saw. Have you tried with a different blade and get the same reuslts?

showing 1 through 15 of 20 replies

Have your say...

You must be signed in to reply.

DISCLAIMER: Any posts on LJ are posted by individuals acting in their own right and do not necessarily reflect the views of LJ. LJ will not be held liable for the actions of any user.

Latest Projects | Latest Blog Entries | Latest Forum Topics