Thanks: 
Likes: 
Needs Pictures: 
Picture(s) thanks:
Results 1 to 3 of 3
-
2nd November 2008, 06:53 PM #1
What... you mean it's not 1792?
- Join Date
- Oct 2006
- Location
- Melbourne
- Posts
- 5,271
Thicknessers: PT330 vs. AP13AK vs. CT-317
I've searched and searched, but I'm still none the wiser as to which of the GMC PT330, Ryobi AP13AK or Carba-tec CT-317 thicknessers is the better buy.
- Power wise, the GMC and Ryobi are both 2000W and the C-T is 1,500W
- The GMC's no-load speed is 6,500RPM while the Ryobi's is 9,000RPM and the C-T's is unspecified. In theory, this means the Ryobi should produce a finer finish (assuming the Ryobi has a similar two-blade head as the GMC - the specs don't say).
- The planing capacities are virtually identical, though the C-T claims a 5mm cut vs. 3mm for the GMC and Ryobi (a non issue as far as I'm concerned).
- The GMC has a two year warranty, the Ryobi has (?) and the C-T has (?)
- The GMC price is $390, the Ryobi is $399 and the C-T is $408 if you include the optional dust chute (included with the other two machines).
Would someone please help me make up my mind? When all's said and done, if they're so similar in performance, then the one with the longest warranty gets my money..
I know you believe you understand what you think I wrote, but I'm not sure you realize that what you just read is not what I meant.
Regards, Woodwould.
-
2nd November 2008 06:53 PM # ADSGoogle Adsense Advertisement
- Join Date
- Always
- Location
- Advertising world
- Posts
- Many
-
5th November 2008, 07:25 PM #2
Class Clown
- Join Date
- Nov 2005
- Location
- Darkest NSW
- Posts
- 3,207
I bought the Ryobi, but I wish I hadn't......the thicknesser is the only weak point in my workshop.
This class of machine all suffer from the same problem(s) to some degree. I thought I could live with it, but now wish I'd spent a bit more on a better machine.
All of these cheap thicknessers DO NOT have a cutterhead lock. This means you will get snipe at the start and end of the cut, so all timber has to be prepared about 100mm over finished length, thicknessed, then the sniped sections removed to get to correct final dimension.
The other issue (which I never even considered at the time) is that the single feed rate of these machines is too fast to give a good surface finish. A unit with fast/slow feed rates is better, but none of the cheap units have this.
I'm saving up for the Carbatec CTJ-681 or similar, at which point the Ryobi thicknesser will be flogged off or donated to a good home.
So, to summarise, my answer would be "(d) none of the above".....
-
5th November 2008, 10:13 PM #3
What... you mean it's not 1792?
- Join Date
- Oct 2006
- Location
- Melbourne
- Posts
- 5,271
Thanks for the warning.
.
I know you believe you understand what you think I wrote, but I'm not sure you realize that what you just read is not what I meant.
Regards, Woodwould.
Reply With Quote
Similar Threads
-
thicknessers
By robyn2839 in forum WOODWORK - GENERALReplies: 19Last Post: 12th April 2008, 10:47 AM -
Ryobi AP13AK thicknesser
By Leupold in forum JOINTERS, MOULDERS, THICKNESSERS, ETCReplies: 1Last Post: 26th January 2008, 06:23 PM -
Thicknessers
By Blackers in forum HAND TOOLS - POWEREDReplies: 5Last Post: 24th November 2005, 03:23 PM -
Thicknessers
By AldgateCC in forum JOINTERS, MOULDERS, THICKNESSERS, ETCReplies: 6Last Post: 2nd June 2003, 11:25 PM
