"Glenn Ashmore" ) writes:

I just cannot for the life of me figure a way to fit my Powermatic 66
cabinet saw in the back stateroom!

If it's some sort of table saw, remove the legs and build it into the
settee(?) like one of those pop-up cabinet sewing machines?

Could be difficult.
They look like THIS and weigh about 600 lbs.

"William R. Watt" wrote in message ...
"Glenn Ashmore" ) writes:

I just cannot for the life of me figure a way to fit my Powermatic 66
cabinet saw in the back stateroom!

If it's some sort of table saw, remove the legs and build it into the
settee(?) like one of those pop-up cabinet sewing machines?

On 18 Nov 2005 14:01:41 GMT, (William R.
Watt) wrote:

TF Jones mentioned the lack of durability of hand held power drills in one
of his books. So I've bought 3 old ones at garage sales for $1-$3.
Unpainted aluminum casing, single speed, but they do the simple jobs and I
haven't wasted a lot of money on them.

Will,

When is spending money _not_ wasting money for you?

Just curious.

pcf

On Thu, 17 Nov 2005 22:13:28 GMT, "Roger Derby"
wrote:

I was given a Milwaukee Sawzall, broken. It cost $65 dollars to repair with
most of the money going to Milwaukee for a couple of replacement parts. It
took several weeks and the on/off switch is still an iffy thing.

Let's see here, you take a disused tool, attempt to repair it
yourself, and then take your resultant lack of satisfaction as a
demonstration of the quality of the tool.

Right?

Could there be any logical errors here?

Actually, that was the bill from an outfit calling itself "Milwaukee Tool
Repair" in Louisville, KY. They were quite apologetic about the several
week delay and the high cost of parts. The firm has a good reputation
amongst the professional contractors in the area.

Logical errors are usually incorporated by the person constructing the
strawman.

Roger

http://home.earthlink.net/~derbyrm

"P.C. Ford" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 17 Nov 2005 22:13:28 GMT, "Roger Derby"
wrote:

I was given a Milwaukee Sawzall, broken. It cost $65 dollars to repair
with
most of the money going to Milwaukee for a couple of replacement parts.
It
took several weeks and the on/off switch is still an iffy thing.

Let's see here, you take a disused tool, attempt to repair it
yourself, and then take your resultant lack of satisfaction as a
demonstration of the quality of the tool.

Right?

Could there be any logical errors here?

P.C. Ford ) writes:

When is spending money _not_ wasting money for you?

When you get back more than you spend.

Finding ways to spend as little as possible is just as interesting and
creative as trying to get back as much as possible. They suppliment each
other.

On 19 Nov 2005 14:50:05 GMT, (William R.
Watt) wrote:

P.C. Ford ) writes:

When is spending money _not_ wasting money for you?

When you get back more than you spend.

Finding ways to spend as little as possible is just as interesting and
creative as trying to get back as much as possible. They suppliment each
other.

Having a wider range of cheaper tools can be better than having fewer
more expensive tools.

Though sometimes the cheapest tool just can't do a job like a more
expensive tool can.

Eg a cheaper belt sander can do a reasonable job, but the cheapest
palm/orbital sander often isn't a lot of good.

cheers,
Pete.

Yes, there are "mistakes" for sale out there. My son bought a bench
grinder. Looks good. Spins up the wheels -- until you put a screwdriver
against the wheel. Then the 0.01 hp motor stalls. But cheap.

I figure it's a gamble every time I buy a super bargain. That said, I've
won more often than not.

Roger

http://home.earthlink.net/~derbyrm

"Pete C" wrote in message
...
On 19 Nov 2005 14:50:05 GMT, (William R.
Watt) wrote:
P.C. Ford ) writes:
When is spending money _not_ wasting money for you?

When you get back more than you spend.
Finding ways to spend as little as possible is just as interesting and
creative as trying to get back as much as possible. They suppliment
each other.

Having a wider range of cheaper tools can be better than having fewer
more expensive tools.

Though sometimes the cheapest tool just can't do a job like a more
expensive tool can.

Eg a cheaper belt sander can do a reasonable job, but the cheapest
palm/orbital sander often isn't a lot of good.

If it's a tool which i will use a lot, i'll get the very best that i can
afford (Powermatic, Festool, Fein, Porter-Cable, Milwaukee). If it's one
which i won't use much, i'll buy a POS from Harbor Freight, Sears or Ryobi.
I don't want to lose time because of a bad tool.


"Roger Derby" wrote in message
ink.net...
Yes, there are "mistakes" for sale out there. My son bought a bench
grinder. Looks good. Spins up the wheels -- until you put a screwdriver
against the wheel. Then the 0.01 hp motor stalls. But cheap.

I figure it's a gamble every time I buy a super bargain. That said, I've
won more often than not.

Roger

http://home.earthlink.net/~derbyrm

"Pete C" wrote in message
...
On 19 Nov 2005 14:50:05 GMT, (William R.
Watt) wrote:
P.C. Ford ) writes:
When is spending money _not_ wasting money for you?

When you get back more than you spend.
Finding ways to spend as little as possible is just as interesting and
creative as trying to get back as much as possible. They suppliment
each other.

Having a wider range of cheaper tools can be better than having fewer
more expensive tools.

Though sometimes the cheapest tool just can't do a job like a more
expensive tool can.

Eg a cheaper belt sander can do a reasonable job, but the cheapest
palm/orbital sander often isn't a lot of good.

Jim Conlin wrote:
If it's a tool which i will use a lot, i'll get the very best that i can
afford (Powermatic, Festool, Fein, Porter-Cable, Milwaukee). If it's one
which i won't use much, i'll buy a POS from Harbor Freight, Sears or Ryobi.
I don't want to lose time because of a bad tool.


Only a fool would argue with you.

Lew