|
Post by Tom Gensmer on Mar 24, 2014 21:09:57 GMT -5
Hi fellas! In this thread I'm going to post pics of my KSS-400 in use, and comparing it to other saws. To start things off, I'm going to post a bunch of pics to launch this thread, and I'll add text and thoughts in a few days when I have time to do so. Most of these photos show the size relationships between the KSS-400 and KSS-300, and the KSS-400 and MT-55cc. Enjoy!
|
|
|
Post by Tom Gensmer on Mar 24, 2014 21:11:17 GMT -5
A few more comparing the 300 with the 400
|
|
|
Post by Tom Gensmer on Mar 24, 2014 21:12:29 GMT -5
The last few comparing the KSS saws Attachments:
|
|
|
Post by Tom Gensmer on Mar 24, 2014 21:14:01 GMT -5
....and a few comparing the KSS-400 to the MT-55cc. I'll add text to these posts when I get a chance, but for now I at least wanted to get the pics posted up. Enjoy!
|
|
|
Post by MrToolJunkie on Mar 24, 2014 22:19:00 GMT -5
Great pics...really adds perspective between these two saws.
|
|
|
Post by 7 on Mar 24, 2014 22:42:14 GMT -5
Really appreciate the pictures. I had in my mind the KSS 400 and the KSS 300 closer in size to each other than the KSS 400 & MT55. Does it feel about like the 55 in your hand as far as weight, balance, and overall size are concerned? I have a couple big deck projects on the horizon and it is making me want the KSS 400. And I might as well mention that you aren't helping tomg
|
|
|
Post by jonathan on Mar 25, 2014 10:42:58 GMT -5
Mafell just posted a picture on their Facebook page hinting at 25years since they brought the KSS system to market. I knew it's been around for a while, but hard to believe something this sophisticated has been around for a quarter century though I assume the saws have gone through some revisions & updates over the years though, anyone who knows more about this? Man, if only Mafell were better at marketing...
|
|
|
Post by garch on Mar 25, 2014 20:59:32 GMT -5
Really appreciate the pictures. I had in my mind the KSS 400 and the KSS 300 closer in size to each other than the KSS 400 & MT55. Does it feel about like the 55 in your hand as far as weight, balance, and overall size are concerned? I have a couple big deck projects on the horizon and it is making me want the KSS 400. And I might as well mention that you aren't helping tomg Here's my two cents: As far as handling, not at all like the mt55. Size somewhat similar. Balance, for what it's worth I feel all of the Mafell products to be well balanced: my ZSX is just as balanced as my MKS 130 and my mt55. I use the KSS 400 for general carpentry tasks and the mt55 for ripping solid stock and cutting down panel products. I hate the feel of trying to cross cut 2x's, etc with the mt55. Feels really awkward. The kss400 would be perfect for a deck project, I'd never use my mt55 for that type of project unless I only owned that one saw.
|
|
|
Post by 7 on Mar 25, 2014 21:59:12 GMT -5
I agree completely on the MT55 being very awkward for anything except track use. I used the KSS 300 for a deck recently and it was great for the surface but about at its limit cutting 2x12 joists. I typically use a standard worm drive circular saw for the framing portions anyway but only brought the 300 because we were only hired for the surface this time on an already framed deck but ended up adding blocking to the framing. Trex decking is popular around here and every piece comes from the factory slightly out of square on the ends so it saves a lot of time using a KSS saw to quickly true the ends and saves the small hassle of holding the speed square and riding the worm drive saw base along the edge of the square. I do a lot of decks and am pretty talented at coming up with sales pitches for myself.
Thanks again for the response.
|
|
|
Post by mick on Mar 26, 2014 14:03:39 GMT -5
New here great read looking to buy the 400 so really helpfull to see the photos as I haven't seen one in the flesh How do you guys find it when using as a standard saw without the track Thanks Mick
|
|
|
Post by GhostFist on Mar 26, 2014 15:07:04 GMT -5
I don't own the 400 but the smaller 300. Handles just like a regular saw except with the parallel rise and fall system you can easily and accurately set the depth or do plunge cuts. So Imo it handles better than a standard sidewinder.
|
|
sgtrjp
Junior Member
Posts: 65
|
Post by sgtrjp on Mar 26, 2014 15:21:02 GMT -5
I've done a number of plunge cuts with my 300, but still find them awkward. Hopefully it gets better, but I'm not too worried about it. It's just a bonus that I have plunge capability in this little saw. I say it's awkward but that's in relation to my TS. It's much better than doing plunge cuts with my old PC or Skil circ saws. Since I have the 300 and not the 400, I'll probably keep my old saws for larger pieces. Only stuff that is too big for my 300 and too rough for my TS. I don't see it happening, but if I see more of it, I would definitely consider a 400. Especially when I read that 7 is cutting 2x12's with his 300 Besides, I've got my P1cc for the odd large timber.
|
|
|
Post by wrightwoodwork on Mar 26, 2014 15:46:11 GMT -5
Excellent just like a normal circular saw I use mine without the rail for doing rips etc
|
|
|
Post by mick on Mar 26, 2014 16:04:14 GMT -5
Thanks guys That's good I carry two makita saws in the van one is a small 18v lxt great for small jobs and the other is a standard side winder don't really want 3 in the van so that makes it easer I use a festool 55 regularly not mine great on a track but would not like using it without the track so that was why I was asking Thanks
|
|
|
Post by wrightwoodwork on Mar 26, 2014 16:05:11 GMT -5
For plunge cuts the mechanism needs to be lightly oiled, so it works smoothly. Then when making the plunge you have to push forward as you push the lever down to make the plunge cut.
|
|