Making a Byrnes style Bench Saw

[johnv]

A friend showed me his Byrnes table saw, and I was immediately impressed by its size, weight, quality design and construction.
I like to make tools and machinery, and since I could find no examples for sale, decided to make one along similar lines to be used in future model ship building.
My friend extolled the virtues of the saw, but he had 2 criticisms. The motor was underpowered, and the table was too short. I watched Ohla Batchvarov's video assessing the saw and could see that the table is indeed too short, with the sliding attachment almost falling off at the end of cutting strokes. So I made my table 100mm longer, at 400mm.
Also, I am using a 750w speed controlled AC Servo motor, which is small enough to fit inside the box/carcass. That is a considerable increase from the Byrnes 200w motor. It also has automatic braking and soft start. And matches the motors which I have used for my drum sander and disk sander.
I started by drawing up the intended construction on AutoCAD (2D) and SolidWorks (3D) see photos. Some aspects were revised as construction proceeded.
And now I well into the construction. I am an amateur metalworker, but have accumulated various skills in the past 2 decades, including lathe work, mill work, CNC machining, silver soldering, welding, metal casting etc. My icon shows a cannon which I made, along with several others in recent years.
My design is strongly influenced by the Byrnes table saw, but is not a copy, and I trust that no intellectual or legal rights have been infringed. It is for my personal use, and I do not intend to make more than one. However, if there is interest I will make my design, plans, specifications available.
The case and table top are made from 12mm aluminium. The main shaft arms are from 16mm alu.
The 3rd photo is a genuine Byrnes.
This project is paused, while waiting for parts to arrive from OS.

 

[Bryian]

wow, thats nice work.

 

[DAWarden-(Jaager)]

Congratulations on solving the small tablesaw availability problem.

Just a comment on the two criticisms of the Jim saw:
If by too short, you mean not wide enough, there is an upgrade to an 18" wide table. It allows the fence to remain when the sliding table is in use.

The power provided by the motor, I just take a situation where that occurs as meaning that I am asking the Jim saw to do a job better and more safely done by a larger and more often different type machine.
I think that the best use for the saw is with relatively thin stock and slicing off scale boards, keels, beams.
Using it as part of a sawmill operation to get large billets to at least be one dimension in scale is pushing it.
It is probably an exercise in futility or frustration or just dealing with a complaining machine to ask a 4" tablesaw to save having to have the use of a full size bandsaw, 10" tablesaw, thickness sander.

My most challenging factor with the saw is matching the job with an efficient blade for it. The number of sources for 3" and 4" blades is decreasing also.

 

[Y.T.]

Byrnes table saw limits are not its length but the sturdiness of the blade which gets better as kerf (thickness) and diameter of blades increases. Blade must be sturdy on the shaft to make consistent wood cuts. Larger blade diameter calls for more powerful motor and so on. Just buy a 8" or 10" blade diameter commercially available table saw for quarter price and enjoy.

Byrnes saw is not for 2" x 4" lumber. It is for slicing tiny thickness wood sheets not thicker that 4 to 5 mm high.

 

[johnv]

Congratulations on solving the small tablesaw availability problem.

Just a comment on the two criticisms of the Jim saw:
If by too short, you mean not wide enough, there is an upgrade to an 18" wide table. It allows the fence to remain when the sliding table is in use.

The power provided by the motor, I just take a situation where that occurs as meaning that I am asking the Jim saw to do a job better and more safely done by a larger and more often different type machine.
I think that the best use for the saw is with relatively thin stock and slicing off scale boards, keels, beams.
Using it as part of a sawmill operation to get large billets to at least be one dimension in scale is pushing it.
It is probably an exercise in futility or frustration or just dealing with a complaining machine to ask a 4" tablesaw to save having to have the use of a full size bandsaw, 10" tablesaw, thickness sander.

My most challenging factor with the saw is matching the job with an efficient blade for it. The number of sources for 3" and 4" blades is decreasing also.

Thanks for the congrats!

The criticism from the Byrnes saw owner was that there is not enough table behind the blade, not with the width. And watching the Batchvarov video I could see that the sliding work table tended to overbalance at the completion of a cutting pass. I expect that the extra 100mm behind the blade will avoid that tendency. The extra space in the saw carcass allows the motor to be situated inside the carcass, which I think is also an advantage.
Re power. I am sure that 200w is plenty for cross cutting model ship planks etc, but ripping will be easier with more power. And I expect that my saw will be used for thicker material as well, not just model ship building.
But I guess that we will see. I will show further progress in this thread, and a final report when all is finished.

Byrnes table saw limits are not its length but the sturdiness of the blade which gets better as kerf (thickness) and diameter of blades increases. Blade must be sturdy on the shaft to make consistent wood cuts. Larger blade diameter calls for more powerful motor and so on. Just buy a 8" or 10" blade diameter commercially available table saw for quarter price and enjoy.

Byrnes saw is not for 2" x 4" lumber. It is for slicing tiny thickness wood sheets not thicker that 4 to 5 mm high.

I have designed for timber up to 25mm thick, using a blade of 100 to 110mm diameter.
I have a 3hp table saw already for anything bigger than that.