Scroll Saw Blade Comparison

[Sycamore67]

I recently posted about the PS Super Sharp Blades that I tried and how well they cut compared to the FD Polar ones that I normally used.  I ended up buying some more to try and got the #5, #7, and #9 and will try them on compound cutting of some ornaments. 

Below is a picture comparison of the FD #7 (Top) and the PS Super Sharp #7 (Bottom).  

The FD blade has 14 teeth per inch while the Super Sharp has 11.5.  The thickness and width of the blades is almost identical.  So, why does the Super Sharp seem to cut faster and easier?  Perhaps the fewer teeth and longer gullet between teeth help to carry away the sawdust better.  Or as advertised the Super Sharps are just sharper.  The Super Sharp blades also seem to last a bit longer before getting dull.  The bottom line is also the price with the Super Sharps at $9.95 per dozen and the FD Polar at $3.20 per dozen.  If I was making items to sell, I would better analyze the cost and advantages of the Super Sharps.  For some being able to cut faster would be an overall economical advantage.  

 

 

[kmmcrafts]

Flying Dutchman blades used to be my go to blade.. and at times..still is.. that said though.. there is a day and night difference between the FD Ultra Reverse #3 and #5 and the Pegas Modified Geometry #3 and #5.. Those Pegas blades cut way more efficiently faster and last longer as well.. and good smooth back side.. as the Pegas has the reverse teeth.. Pricing is pretty close to the same I think.. I know they aren't a big whopping difference like you show for those super sharps.. I've never tried the super sharps.. might try a few just to see.. but I have a hard time believing they are more cost efficient than those Pegas.. maybe more so for the FD blades.. Those Pegas are hard to beat..

I haven't got too technical on looking at the blades teeth arrangement or even looked to closely at the sizes.. but I will say.. I do know the Pegas #5 MG blade wont fit into the same hole as a #5 FD-UR blade does.. found that out the hard way one day when I bent a almost brand new blade..     

[dgman]

With the PS blades being three times the cost, I'll stick with FD UR blades. They do what I need, and that's good enough for me!

[crupiea]

For years my go to was flying dutchman, always a fan.

For the past few years though i have basically switched to jewelers blades almost for everything. I will cut long straight borders and the like with a #1 or #3 fd but other than that everything is done with a 2/0 jewelers blade.

They are $18 for a gross on amazon. No reverse teeth so they are rough on the back but you just cant beat the tiny areas you can get into with these things. I mainly cut 18" bb so i can get away with it. i routinely have lines that are 1/16" wide and smaller sometimes and these babies are about the only thing that will work.

Funny though that the 3/0 just arent as good, they chip the wood in the back unless I use a backer so 2/0 is the sweet spot for these.

[Sycamore67]

I think I will clarify a bit.  The PS Super Sharps and FD  Polar are not meant to be cutting 1/8" Baltic Birch. I brought this subject up to discuss blades for cutting thick woods or compound cutting of wood 1-1/4" - 1-1/2".   I would never think of using #1 or #3  type blades.  

What blades are others using to make compound cuts in thick wood ?

Can one use the Pegasus Modified Geometry for thick compound cuts?  My experience is that blades similar to the FD Ultra Reverse do poorly in thick wood as they do not clear the dust efficiently. 

 

[NC Scroller]

Reverse tooth blades do not excel in doing compound cutting because the reversed teeth push sawdust back in the cut.  That is why a skip tooth blade is preferred.  For me the FD Polar blade is my first choice.

[Gonzo]

whenever I am doing a compound cut, I am always using a Pegas MG #5. 

[blights69]

Same as Gonzo #5 Mg Pegas for me 

[Bill WIlson]

I just got done cutting 110 compound birdhouse ornaments.  I bought some FD Polar #5's specifically for this, having never used them before.  While they cut marginally better than the Olson #5 Skip tooth I had, they were still lacking in durability and speed of cut.  Perhaps I should have stepped up to the next larger size.  However, I had some Olson MS #7's lying around and even though they are a reverse tooth blade,  I found that they cut soooo much better and lasted much longer than either of the #5 skip tooth blades I tried.  I was using them to cut African Mahogany.  I was able to cut out between 7 & 10 birdhouses with one MS #7 blade, where I was barely able to cut 3 with either of the #5 skip tooth blades.   Not sure I would necessarily recommend a reverse tooth blade over a comparable skip tooth, but in my particular case those Olson MS #7's cut very well. 

[Sycamore67]

This is great hearing what people are using.  I am very interested to hear what woods, wood thickness and blade people are using. 

There is a big difference in cutting 1" versus 1-1/4" versus 1-1/2".  I think Mahogany cut steadily compared to Oak, Ash and harder woods.

I order some Pegasus Modified Geometry Blades this morning based on the comments.

[amazingkevin]

On 12/2/2017 at 11:27 AM, dgman said:

With the PS blades being three times the cost, I'll stick with FD UR blades. They do what I need, and that's good enough for me!

I'm a believer in fd blades to ,the cost is perfect for my budget and they last too long!