I have been using a small handheld doweling jig and can't get accurate
alignment with it
no matter what I do. It's close, and if the holes are reamed out an
extra 64th the results
are acceptable for what I'm doing, but there's always a joint or two
that's about a 16th
off. Could it just be an inferior tool, or maybe inherent in the
design?
Guess who wrote:
> On 26 Mar 2006 19:12:50 -0800, "[email protected]"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>I have been using a small handheld doweling jig and can't get accurate
>>alignment with it
>>no matter what I do.
>
> Handheld? Perhaps you are shaking. Get a Stanley jig, or anything
> similar. I love my Stanley. Place the woods together, a few quick
> pencil marks across the join where I want the dowels to go, and it
> takes little time once the jig is set up. Hold the wood in a vice
> while drilling.
>
I have 2 Stanley 59s. Both drill off center by 1/32" if you align with
the scale on the tool. Not a big problem once you know about it, but I
wouldn't give Stanley any brownie points for accuracy :-).
--
It's turtles, all the way down
[email protected] wrote:
> I have been using a small handheld doweling jig and can't get accurate
> alignment with it
> no matter what I do. It's close, and if the holes are reamed out an
> extra 64th the results
> are acceptable for what I'm doing, but there's always a joint or two
> that's about a 16th
> off. Could it just be an inferior tool, or maybe inherent in the
> design?
Are you using brad-point bits?
If it's handheld, a regular bit might slide a bit because of the grain
in the wood, and pull the jig with it... a brad point might help.
er
--
email not valid
In article <[email protected]>,
"[email protected]" <[email protected]> wrote:
> I have been using a small handheld doweling jig and can't get accurate
> alignment with it
> no matter what I do. It's close, and if the holes are reamed out an
> extra 64th the results
> are acceptable for what I'm doing, but there's always a joint or two
> that's about a 16th
> off. Could it just be an inferior tool, or maybe inherent in the
> design?
Could the bushing be worn?
I use a DeWalt drill bit with that little pilot bit in the end. I find that
gives me the least lateral stress on the guide bushing. A 32nd one way plus a
32nd the other way.. there's your 16th. Not hard to do if you're a bit heavy
handed.
I use a Stanley #59... never found one I like better.
In article <[email protected]>,
Larry Blanchard <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> I have 2 Stanley 59s. Both drill off center by 1/32" if you align with
> the scale on the tool. Not a big problem once you know about it, but I
> wouldn't give Stanley any brownie points for accuracy :-).
I calibrated my Stanley 59 myself by filing in a new set of markings.
It's pretty close now. But you're right, it wasn't great out of the box.
On 26 Mar 2006 19:12:50 -0800, "[email protected]"
<[email protected]> wrote:
>I have been using a small handheld doweling jig and can't get accurate
>alignment with it
>no matter what I do.
Handheld? Perhaps you are shaking. Get a Stanley jig, or anything
similar. I love my Stanley. Place the woods together, a few quick
pencil marks across the join where I want the dowels to go, and it
takes little time once the jig is set up. Hold the wood in a vice
while drilling.
On 26 Mar 2006 19:12:50 -0800, "[email protected]"
<[email protected]> wrote:
> there's always a joint or two
>that's about a 16th
>off.
Second option. You might have one piece turned over and are matching
the wrong sides. I have no problem with the Stanley, but you might
want to pre-mark to match in case that is what is happening.
I have seen a doweling jig that you held by hand as you drilled the holes.
Chances are, if you are using that, the jig is slipping. Try clamping it.
"[email protected]" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> I have been using a small handheld doweling jig and can't get accurate
> alignment with it
> no matter what I do. It's close, and if the holes are reamed out an
> extra 64th the results
> are acceptable for what I'm doing, but there's always a joint or two
> that's about a 16th
> off. Could it just be an inferior tool, or maybe inherent in the
> design?
>