>>2868694
None of that is relevant to the point of discussion.

>you could make a ridiculous enough saw that could easily beat any ordinary corded
And saws like that have been on the market for years, readily available at hardware stores, in contrast to your statement here >>2868319.
>my mag will destroy the dewalt in an apples to apples test.

It's generally not a big deal to be wrong about an item of trivia, particularly some development in an area you haven't kept up with. But getting emotionally invested and doubling down when corrected leads to a lot of problems when people do that in other parts of life.

>When you see cordless saws with the same power as my corded 6.5 HP shop vac (4800 watts) let us know.
They already do. That power rating is the inrush current as the motor starts spinning. If you hooked it up to a dynamometer, you'd find a few hundred Watts of output power. Shop Vac claims 12A current draw and 335 Watts output for a similar vacuum. You might have been clued into this by being able to run the vacuum on a 15A circuit without tripping the breaker. The far more powerful motors on those saws have large starting currents too, but since that's not a meaningful performance metric, it's not advertised. Shop vacs are somewhat unique in that regard.

>run, under load, for 10 or 20 hours straight on a single charge. That might be worth something. Until then it’s a homeowner toy.
Is that how you think professional framers use their circular saws?

>>2868717
>SKIL SPT70V-11
>15A motor, same as the MAG-77
That has a lot of torque, but it's a lot less powerful than the high-end cordless saws shown above.

Back | Go to board

Board:

/diy/

Thread:

Why are 7-1/4 circular saws the standard outside of framing? I know they’re the smallest that can make miter cuts in 2x, but it seems like the times…