Re: JET bandsaw update

nailshooter41@xxxxxxx wrote:
Harvey, my hat is off to you. I would never have had the patience to
do what you did, nor would I feel like it was my responisibilty to make
a usable saw out of a brand new piece of equipment. I would expect
that much from HF, but not from Jet.

Shame on Jet for letting you do that, too. Have they no pride? HF
tools are sometimes "kit tools" but NOT Jet. In the old days, it was
"take the tool back where you bought it and we will authorized an
exchange for a new one". Jet did that for me twice when they were
working the kinks our of their mini lathe, and they replaced an entire
drill press for one of my friends.

Of all the humiliation.... I cannot believe you did this, or had to do
this, or were talking to someone so far out of the game that you needed
to do this:

<<I created a web page to show the JET tech what was going on. >>

Good for you that you got what you wanted. I might still be fighting
that fight (and NO DOUBT losing it), and would never be satisfied after
that as I would think I found only the obvious stuff that was not
right. Jet is lucky to have you for a customer.

And as for Jet... shame on them.

Robert

In all fairness to JET, I never asked for a replacement, so will never know if that was an option. Also, I am certainly not the first to have to modify a factory saw to bring it into acceptable specs. Stories abound referring to all teh major manufacturers.

OTOH, I really wasn't looking forward to having to send this saw back, etc. (mail order) Also, I had little faith that another saw would be much different. I do not see anything on this saw that indicated it was anything but how the factory made it, which I must agree with you on - shame on JET. It seems so easy to design a band saw with coplaner wheels. Why would this arrive off. Perhaps it was a defect. I guess I will never know.

In researching the saw, I was struck but how many similar complaints I read about pretty much all the saws, from not being coplaner to poorly machined tables, to heavy vibrations. It seems obvious, I suppose, but quality of construction has taken a back seat to low production costs. Still, it seems to me that locating holes 1/4" from where they are currently does not increase manufacturing costs, so yes, shame on JET for this. still, trying to be fair (not sure why) the fit and finish on everything else was excellent.

Given the above, the reviews of the JET by users, almost exclusively were 5 star, vs only *mostly* 5 star for others like Grizzly and Delta. In the end, it seemed that the advise I got from one reviewer made sense - of these saws, pick the one with the lowest price. They all have their special features, and in the end they pretty much even out. I think the review was in Fine Woodworking a few months ago.

But humiliation? Nah! Why would I be humiliated. Perhaps JET, but not me.

Thanks,
Harvey
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Changing a linked tables Connect property just with SQL
    ... that's a shame. ... which you're interested is "Jet OLEDB:Link Datasource" ... I'm really trying to avoid COM if at all possible - this is a .NET app which ...
    (microsoft.public.access.externaldata)
  • Re: are ado questions allowed here?
    ... >>distinction between Access and Jet. ... but it would also be a shame to waste the concentration of ... > JET knowledge here, including a lot of ADO/JET knowledge, just ...
    (comp.databases.ms-access)
  • Re: JET bandsaw update
    ... my hat is off to you. ... I would never have had the patience to ... Shame on Jet for letting you do that, ...
    (rec.woodworking)
  • Re: Where is there a Lathe Review?
    ... What I found very helpful when buying my lathe (jet 1442vs) were the reviews at ... wife's collection of miniatures), lidded boxes, goblets, small vases, etc. ...
    (rec.crafts.woodturning)
  • Re: JET bandsaw update
    ... There should be no sense of humiliation on your part. ... Jet claims to have designed ... saying that GM designed cars with their front ends out of alignment. ...
    (rec.woodworking)