Hearth Record

Back to Cutting torches

Glowforge cutting torches

1 report to CPSC, the latest made Nov 3, 2021. A report isn’t a recall.

Watch it to hear when CPSC publishes new reports about it. CPSC’s own search, on saferproducts.gov

Watch and the shortlist are kept with a free account, on every device. Your watch list. CPSC’s own search is on saferproducts.gov.

At a glance

From SaferProducts.gov, released Oct 25, 2026.

  • 1report to CPSC
  • Nov 3, 2021the latest report was made
  • Nov 3, 2021the earliest
  • 1with the company’s comments
Brand
Glowforge
Maker
Glowforge Inc.Makers, importers or sellers, as the reports name them
Product
Cutting torchesCPSC’s product type: Cutting Torches (code 874), in Home Maintenance and Structures: Tools & Hardware

By month

1 report from December 2020 to November 2021; the most in November 2021, 1.
The numbers, as a table
Reports to CPSC by the month each was made, newest first
MonthReports
November 20211

How badly anyone was hurt

  • No one hurt 1 CPSC: Incident, No Injury

As each report says it, in short words; CPSC’s own words are under each.

The reports, as CPSC published them

Reports people made to the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission. CPSC publishes each one after sending it to the company named, and doesn’t guarantee they’re accurate. A report isn’t a recall.

Each report is the words of the person who made it, as CPSC published them. The company’s comments, where CPSC published any, are set apart as the company’s own.

Source:

CPSC, SaferProducts.gov public database export. Released Oct 25, 2026. Updated daily.

  1. No one hurt

    Made Nov 3, 2021, sent to the company Nov 19, 2021, published by CPSC Dec 6, 2021

    The product, in the report: Glowforge laser cutting system Model Glowforge Pro I own a Glowforge laser cutting system. The company is based out of Seattle. After a little over a year of use I have come to the conclusion that these machines appear to be built using very unsafe design practices and their use could lead to catastrophic fire. Electrical faults are rife. The component layout is dangerous. The tube cooling capacity is poor and susceptible to overheating. The main cable that controls the laser head is exceptionally easy to damage during cleaning or maintenance, and the insulation wears off alarmingly quickly, exposing the conductor traces. The main cable also runs very close the stepper motor. These motors run very warm and there is not adequate separation between it and the cable to ensure safety (or reliability). The cable then runs through the drag chain, where it is subject to a great deal of friction and wear. In addition, the machine is advertised as a ‘Pro’ device that is able to cut wood, acrylic and more. However, the electronics, heat sink and exhaust fan are all located next to each other in the same area of the machine. The accumulation of dirt in fumes in both the fan and over those critical components is alarming. The design reduces cooling capacity over time. Finally, there is a red tension cable that carries around 26,000 volts and feeds the laser tube. This cable is not designed to be flexed or strained at all and is very fragile. However, the high tension cable is installed next to the main ribbon cable (mentioned above) which carry control signs. Mains and high voltage signals should also be separated by a considerable margin for safety - the potential for noise and errors passing between the cables could cause glitches, faults and represent a fire hazard. The final area I am concerned with is the ducting supplied with the system. The ductwork expands every time the machine is in use and the creasing and uncreasing cause punctures in the duct, allowing cutting fumes to vent into the user’s work space. The ductwork is not rated for fume extraction. Overall, all of these flaws combined means not only is the machine being falsely advertised as a ‘Pro’ commercial production unit, it’s incredibly unsafe. The vast majority of these lasers are sold and marketed to at-home hobbyists, teachers, and students who would not typically be familiar with the threat of electrical failure and fire these design flaws could lead to. The Glowforge Owner’s forum (which the company runs) is filled with many comments/tickets about fires in these machines, so the company knows these can lead to life-threatening problems but has done nothing to correct these issues. I feel very strongly there should be a recall on these machines.

    I own a Glowforge laser cutting system. The company is based out of Seattle. After a little over a year of use I have come to the conclusion that these machines appear to be built using very unsafe design practices and their use could lead to catastrophic fire. Electrical faults are rife. The component layout is dangerous. The tube cooling capacity is poor and susceptible to overheating. The main cable that controls the laser head is exceptionally easy to damage during cleaning or maintenance, and the insulation wears off alarmingly quickly, exposing the conductor traces. The main cable also runs very close the stepper motor. These motors run very warm and there is not adequate separation between it and the cable to ensure safety (or reliability). The cable then runs through the drag chain, where it is subject to a great deal of friction and wear. In addition, the machine is advertised as a ‘Pro’ device that is able to cut wood, acrylic and more. However, the electronics, heat sink and exhaust fan are all located next to each other in the same area of the machine. The accumulation of dirt in fumes in both the fan and over those critical components is alarming. The design reduces cooling capacity over time. Finally, there is a red tension cable that carries around 26,000 volts and feeds the laser tube. This cable is not designed to be flexed or strained at all and is very fragile. However, the high tension cable is installed next to the main ribbon cable (mentioned above) which carry control signs. Mains and high voltage signals should also be separated by a considerable margin for safety - the potential for noise and errors passing between the cables could cause glitches, faults and represent a fire hazard. The final area I am concerned with is the ducting supplied with the system. The ductwork expands every time the machine is in use and the creasing and uncreasing cause punctures in the duct, allowing cutting fumes to vent into the user’s work space. The ductwork is not rated for fume extraction. Overall, all of these flaws combined means not only is the machine being falsely advertised as a ‘Pro’ commercial production unit, it’s incredibly unsafe. The vast majority of these lasers are sold and marketed to at-home hobbyists who would not typically be familiar with the threat of electrical failure and fire these design flaws could lead to. The Glowforge Owner’s forum (which the company runs) is filled with many comments/tickets about fires in these machines, so the company knows these can lead to life-threatening problems but has done nothing to correct these issues. I feel very strongly there should be a recall on these machines.

    Model
    Glowforge Pro
    Serial number
    QBQ-622-4
    Bought from
    https://glowforge.com/
    Bought
    Aug 16, 2020
    Where
    Little Rock, Arkansas: Home/Apartment/Condominium
    Who was involved
    Age 37, Female
    The reporter’s relation to them
    Self
    As this report names them
    Brand Glowforge, made or sold by Glowforge Inc.
    How badly, in CPSC’s words
    Incident, No Injury

CPSC’s disclaimer

Disclaimer: CPSC does not guarantee the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the contents of the Publicly Available Consumer Product Safety Information Database on SaferProducts.gov, particularly with respect to information submitted by people outside of CPSC.

Source:

Word for word, from the disclaimer in CPSC’s export.

Sources

Sources
  • U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, SaferProducts.gov public database export.

    Released Oct 25, 2026 and checked Oct 25, 2026. Updated daily. Public domain (U.S. Government work). CPSC asks to be credited, and that no endorsement be implied.

Source:

Reports of harm are from the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC), on SaferProducts.gov. CPSC does not endorse Hearth Record.

Back to Cutting torches

How to read a record

Four things every record does, shown on an example record made up for this guide.

An example record, made up for this guide

An example nursing home

Made up for this guide: no real place is shown

Not fully inspected in over two years (CMS flag)

11 health citations at the latest inspection cycle

The state average is 14.3.

Source:

CMS, State and US Averages and Health Deficiencies. Released Oct 8, 2026. Updated monthly.

From the homeNone yet. Replies and paid listings aren’t open, and when they open they will sit here, below the record.

1 of 4

Every fact names its source.

Who published it, when, and how often it changes sit beside each fact, with a link to the agency’s own file.

Sign in

A free account keeps your watch list, shortlists, comparisons and saved searches on every device, and can email you when something you watch changes. Browsing never needs one.