10thumbs
spending too much on rocks
I want to be reincarnated as a dog.
Member since March 2009
Posts: 480
|
Post by 10thumbs on Mar 27, 2009 11:43:00 GMT -5
I recently purchased both of these saws. I got the WF (and a masonry tub) because RockmanKen (and lots of other people) recommended it. I picked up the Rascal used off Craig's list. In another thread I mentioned that I might just return the WF in lieu of the Rock Rascal and Wolfden had this comment: you probably should keep the Workforce thu .. the 6" Rock Rascal is a trim saw Someone else mentioned that they use the WF and the Rock Rascal side-by-side. I'm not sure I understand this. From what I can tell the pros and cons are: WF: Pro - Portable, self contained, larger work surface Cons - Messy, needs to be cleaned and drained after each use, messy. Rock Rascal: Pro - Previous owner said it was not messy but I haven't tried it yet. Runs on oil so it doesn't have to be cleaned immediately after each use. Con - Slightly smaller blade, smaller work surface, runs off an external motor so not portable. What am I missing?
|
|
|
Post by Hard Rock Cafe on Mar 27, 2009 11:56:34 GMT -5
My random thoughts:
Lots of people use the WF to create slabettes, while the RR would be used to cut preforms.
With a 6" blade, you should also be able to use water on the RR if you wanted.
The RR is probably a better made saw and will last longer. It can also handle very thin blades, so you can cut expensive rough (e.g. opal) on it without as much loss of material.
On the other hand, the WF will take a lot of abuse and some people use it to grind.
I'm guessing parts are easier to get for the RR, but that's only a guess.
Chuck
|
|
|
Post by akansan on Mar 27, 2009 12:07:37 GMT -5
The construction blades on the WF will take a lot more abuse, and in my opinion, are better suited to hand-feeding rocks for slabbettes because of that. Because it's a construction saw, it has more RPMs than a lapidary saw, allowing you to cut through the rocks more quickly.
I have two saws - one with a thin lapidary blade, and my WF with its thick construction blade. I use the WF to cut the slabbettes, and the MK-145 to trim my preforms. Cut enough slabbettes to last you, and you don't have to use the WF as frequently. I power my WF up about once a month or so, cut for about 3 or 4 hours, and then I don't need to use it again for another month or so. I'm using my WF outside, so that eliminates the excess water mess.
I'd be hesitant to use a saw of any type indoors with oil. No matter what, the saw will spray a little, and water is easier to clean up than oil...
|
|
10thumbs
spending too much on rocks
I want to be reincarnated as a dog.
Member since March 2009
Posts: 480
|
Post by 10thumbs on Mar 27, 2009 13:01:15 GMT -5
Those are some great points. I did not consider the blade width. Most of my material is fist sized or smaller so a thin blade would help maximize my utilization. What about the cut depths? The WF as a depth of 1 1/4". I found one web site that said the 6" Rock Rascal could handle a 2" cut. That seems gratuitous though.
|
|
|
Post by deb193redux on Mar 27, 2009 15:24:15 GMT -5
wait - you cannot cut fist sized material with a thin blade. You will be out $20 to $60 for a new blade each time you cut a rock.
The thin blade can TRIM slabs close to 1/4 inch w/o bending or cutting crooked or binding. You cannot hand feed a rock and made a small slab (slabbette) on a thin blade. They bend too easily. Anything less than .032 is going to be bendy at 6" diameter, and under .020 will need to be handled gently.
You can use the RR with oil or water to make precise cuts to trim preforms out of slabs. It will not waste material. You can do this with the WF, but it does eat a bit more material and the hole around the blade is wider and I have had slabs tip down into it.
For hacking up your fist sized rough into small slabs - some uneven and some with a nipple in the center (or other saw mark) use the WF. The 3400 RPM and the 3/4hp motor will make the job quicker too. The extra 1/8 - 1/4 inch from the 7" blade can be real handy too sometimes.
If you want to start rounding the edges on the side of the blade, because you aren't planning to grind the shape any further, use the thick WF blade.
You can get thicker (i.e., .050) blades for the 6" RR. You can change the pulley so the RR runs faster than 1725 RPM. Most slintered blades today can easily handle the higher speed, so the 1725 standard is a bit outdated.
Unless I was making a fine cut, I generally cut on the WF because I am impatient. I had a $30 Pro-slicer or Gorilla blade on the RR, but it was just slow.
I do not think the RR can do a 2" cut, although the rule of thumb is 1/3 of the blade diameter. It is mounted so it sticks up a bit more through the table than the WF, so the cut depths are about equal. Except that you can only cut very soft rock very slowly with a RR if you are cutting anything thicker than 1/2 inch.
Keep them both for a while until you have a good sense of each. You can always unload one later. I suspect you will appreciate and keep both.
|
|
|
Post by frane on Mar 29, 2009 11:26:16 GMT -5
I have to agree. keep them both. The WF will be great for the initial rough and even for the rough cuts on the preforms but for softer slabs and greater precision on preforms, use the trim saw. Fran
|
|
docharber
has rocks in the head
Member since October 2008
Posts: 693
|
Post by docharber on Mar 29, 2009 19:16:58 GMT -5
I have both and they are different tools for different purposes. I find the rock rascal better for delicate cutting and less tolerant of abuse because of the thinner blades. Some of these are so delicate that if they bind they will literally wrinkle, and they're toast. The WF can do much of what the RR can dos, but as the others have said It isn't suitable for cutting expensive material and is great for faceting material. I recently bought one of the Rocklady sintered 6" diamiond blades for my RR with adapter for about $22 with shipping. Best deal in the business. As for coolant, the RR generally uses water and does spray some. Use it where the water won't matter. I have been advised to user a water soluble oil coolant with my RR, too. I haven't used it enough to really appreciate the difference it makes. My rr doesn't have a drain and I find a cheap bulb baster from K-Mart works fine to suck out the waste water.
Mark H.
|
|
|
Post by johnjsgems on Mar 29, 2009 21:15:35 GMT -5
Most people that say trim saws "spray water" (or oil) have either overfilled coolant or raised guard up too high. Coolant should just cover blade rim. You should have a steady drip from blade guard. If you try to cut something 2" you will no doubt get a coolant shower. I'm of the generation that still thinks "metal good, plastic cheap junk". I think the Rock Rascal is a great value for a metal bodied saw at the typical low price. I'd use it with oil unless you are cutting opal or turquoise or something sensitive to oil. Trim saws are really meant to trim slabs for preforms or maybe slabbing turquoise nuggets, opals, etc. If you want a good slab and trim saw fid a good 8" or 10" lapidary saw.
|
|
drjo
fully equipped rock polisher
Honduran Opal & DIY Nut
Member since May 2008
Posts: 1,581
|
Post by drjo on Mar 29, 2009 22:26:20 GMT -5
Most people that say trim saws "spray water" (or oil) have either overfilled coolant or raised guard up too high. Coolant should just cover blade rim. You should have a steady drip from blade guard. If you try to cut something 2" you will no doubt get a coolant shower. I'm of the generation that still thinks "metal good, plastic cheap junk". I think the Rock Rascal is a great value for a metal bodied saw at the typical low price. I'd use it with oil unless you are cutting opal or turquoise or something sensitive to oil. Trim saws are really meant to trim slabs for preforms or maybe slabbing turquoise nuggets, opals, etc. If you want a good slab and trim saw fid a good 8" or 10" lapidary saw. +1 Dr Joe .
|
|
docharber
has rocks in the head
Member since October 2008
Posts: 693
|
Post by docharber on Mar 31, 2009 10:09:02 GMT -5
I figured out why my RR is so wet. It leaks out the screw hole in the deck and the splash guard was screwed to the outside of the table. Much better now. Still it spits a little.
Mark H.
|
|