http://tinyurl.com/moplnx
A saw horse design that first appeared in Mother Earth many years ago
as a $6 saw horse.
If you follow the cut list exactly, you get a saw horse from two
2x4's, some saw dust and not much else.
Have built several.
One can be used along with a circular saw to cross cut 2x4's.
It's a well thought out design.
Enjoy.
Lew
On Jul 13, 12:55=A0am, "Lew Hodgett" <[email protected]> wrote:
> I take it you operate with tongue firmly planted in cheek these days.
You betcha. I could have blown out a cheek on that one. My tongue is
kinda flattened out on the end from the pressure.
I have never understood why someone would even vaguely criticize, or
post any kind of snotty remark when when another is trying to pass
some helpful info along.
I was thinking, wow.... can you imagine... he has seen that before as
many as six times. What's the point of the remark? He reads more
than some? He feels that reading the same article more than once
makes him a more experienced woodworker?
Was he showing off his reading skills?
Dunno.... not an impressive skill set if he had to read the same
articles and plans six times to get the info in the noggin.
I say if anyone has ANYTHING of use to post, fire away.
If someone doesn't care for, like, or just can't stand useful info,
they should at least be able to keep a sock in their mouth and go to
the next post to let the others here without the vast reading
experience (not necessarily practical) enjoy a posting for the first
time.
Good on 'ya Lew, for posting something useful.
Robert
On Jul 12, 2:14=A0am, "Lew Hodgett" <[email protected]> wrote:
> DUH!
>
> It's three 2x4's, not two dummy.
Or two 3X4s, maybe? No! LOL.
Sonny
DUH!
It's three 2x4's, not two dummy.
Lew
----------------------------------
"Lew Hodgett" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> http://tinyurl.com/moplnx
>
> A saw horse design that first appeared in Mother Earth many years
> ago as a $6 saw horse.
>
> If you follow the cut list exactly, you get a saw horse from two
> 2x4's, some saw dust and not much else.
>
> Have built several.
>
> One can be used along with a circular saw to cross cut 2x4's.
>
> It's a well thought out design.
>
> Enjoy.
>
> Lew
>
>
<[email protected]> wrote:
>An excellent reason for Lew not to share with folks that might not
have seen them.
>Shame on you, Lew. Save your good deeds and efforts until you run
them by old Larry for approval.
-------------------------------------
I take it you operate with tongue firmly planted in cheek these days.
Lew
.
<[email protected]> wrote:
> I was thinking, wow.... can you imagine... he has seen that before
> as
many as six times. What's the point of the remark?
<snip>
----------------------------
The subject line says it all.
Lew
On Tue, 13 Jul 2010 15:11:54 -0700 (PDT), RP <[email protected]> wrote:
>On Jul 12, 3:14 am, "Lew Hodgett" <[email protected]> wrote:
>> DUH!
>>
>> It's three 2x4's, not two dummy.
>>
>> Lew
>> ----------------------------------"Lew Hodgett" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>
>> news:[email protected]...
>>
>>
>>
>> >http://tinyurl.com/moplnx
>>
>> > A saw horse design that first appeared in Mother Earth many years
>> > ago as a $6 saw horse.
>>
>> > If you follow the cut list exactly, you get a saw horse from two
>> > 2x4's, some saw dust and not much else.
>>
>> > Have built several.
>>
>> > One can be used along with a circular saw to cross cut 2x4's.
>>
>> > It's a well thought out design.
>>
>> > Enjoy.
>>
>> > Lew- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
> Too many fasteners and they're tough on saw blades.. I built a
>set of ponies with too many screws in it and decided to pull the
>screws and use 1/4" dowels, worked great. After the glue set up....
That was my thought, too. I was thinking about screwing the bottom horizontal
pieces from the bottom and gluing the top horizontal on. They could still be
replaced, though with a little more work. Maybe even some hardboard glued on
top.
> Good for inspiration though. I like my ponies at 36" or so. I
>have one set at 42"
That thought crossed my mind too. That height might be good for breaking down
sheet goods, though. I have a pile (nine, I think) of the collapsing plastic
horses I use for most things. They're easy to carry around.
On Jul 13, 4:38=A0pm, [email protected] (Larry W) wrote:
> My intention was to poke fun at ShopNotes, not Lew!
Then you have my apology.
Robert
On Jul 12, 4:17=A0pm, Larry Jaques <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Mon, 12 Jul 2010 00:14:27 -0700, "Lew Hodgett"
> <[email protected]> wrote the following:
>
> >DUH!
>
> >It's three 2x4's, not two dummy.
>
> So they weigh 25 pounds each and you can't stack 'em. Pass.
They look like they stack to me. That's the reason for the 6"
measurement on the side ties.
> For me, the limitations outweigh the benefits.
Heavy, to be sure. I thought about building a pair and hanging them
from the ceiling to save on space. They would be handy for the garage
to cut down sheet goods.
On Jul 12, 6:13=A0am, Sonny <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Jul 12, 2:14=A0am, "Lew Hodgett" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > DUH!
>
> > It's three 2x4's, not two dummy.
>
> Or two 3X4s, maybe? =A0No! =A0LOL.
>
> Sonny
plus a decent chunk of 2x12? at least that's what it looks like from
the diagram...
On Jul 13, 7:01=A0am, Larry Jaques <[email protected]> wrote:
> P.S: Gee, can't I have an opinion, Robert?
Of course you can. My comments were aimed at Larry W, not you.
You posted your opinion which and why you felt the way you did about
the horses. So did dpb, keith86, etc. No problem.
Again, I said post anything "of use". Maybe I took it wrong, but I
didn't like the casual driveby snottiness of the post. It added
nothing to the discussion.
And with all the political stuff/bait that is posted here I thought it
was nice of Lew to post something that was useful about woodworking.
When I saw that "been there done that got the T shirt" remark, I
didn't care for it.
Few enough people post anything of use here, no reason to discourage
anyone (no matter the reason behind it) from posting information
someone could use.
Robert
On Jul 12, 4:34=A0pm, [email protected] (Larry W) wrote:
> It is a nice design. I believe I also saw a similar design in
> ShopNotes magazine - about 6 times.
An excellent reason for Lew not to share with folks that might not
have seen them.
Shame on you, Lew. Save your good deeds and efforts until you run
them by old Larry for approval.
Robert
On Mon, 12 Jul 2010 23:42:28 -0700 (PDT), "[email protected]"
<[email protected]> wrote the following:
>On Jul 13, 12:55 am, "Lew Hodgett" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> I take it you operate with tongue firmly planted in cheek these days.
>
>You betcha. I could have blown out a cheek on that one. My tongue is
>kinda flattened out on the end from the pressure.
This, too, shall pass.
>I have never understood why someone would even vaguely criticize, or
>post any kind of snotty remark when when another is trying to pass
>some helpful info along.
What, only the OP's opinion is valid, Naily? Nobody can say "I tried
that but it didn't work for me. Here's what I did.", or point out
flaws which others can take a whack at resolving? Your method stifles
creativity more than our posts do, sir.
>I was thinking, wow.... can you imagine... he has seen that before as
>many as six times. What's the point of the remark? He reads more
>than some? He feels that reading the same article more than once
>makes him a more experienced woodworker?
>
>Was he showing off his reading skills?
He was commenting that ShopNotes was overly repetitive.
(Now whose reading skills are in question? ;)
>Dunno.... not an impressive skill set if he had to read the same
>articles and plans six times to get the info in the noggin.
>
>I say if anyone has ANYTHING of use to post, fire away.
That's not what you said above.
>If someone doesn't care for, like, or just can't stand useful info,
>they should at least be able to keep a sock in their mouth and go to
>the next post to let the others here without the vast reading
>experience (not necessarily practical) enjoy a posting for the first
>time.
Would you have been less critical if I'd pointed out what I felt were
the good points of the design, and not just the bad?
>Good on 'ya Lew, for posting something useful.
Yabbut, it wasn't political.
--
EXPLETIVE: A balm, usually applied verbally in hindsight,
which somehow eases those pains and indignities following
our every deficiency in foresight.
On 13 July, 23:11, RP <[email protected]> wrote:
> =A0 =A0 =A0Too many fasteners and they're tough on saw blades.. I built a
> set of ponies with too many screws in it and decided to pull the
> screws and use 1/4" dowels, worked great. After the glue set up....
Mine are solid wood tops to at least the depth of my biggest saw
blade. Means I can work very quickly for a lot of cuts and simply cut
through the top of my trestles. It's surprising how long they last and
it's obviously a quicker way to work.
I wonder how a variant of this trestle (steel free!) would work for
bucking firewood logs?
On Jul 12, 3:14=A0am, "Lew Hodgett" <[email protected]> wrote:
> DUH!
>
> It's three 2x4's, not two dummy.
>
> Lew
> ----------------------------------"Lew Hodgett" <[email protected]> =
wrote in message
>
> news:[email protected]...
>
>
>
> >http://tinyurl.com/moplnx
>
> > A saw horse design that first appeared in Mother Earth many years
> > ago as a $6 saw horse.
>
> > If you follow the cut list exactly, you get a saw horse from two
> > 2x4's, some saw dust and not much else.
>
> > Have built several.
>
> > One can be used along with a circular saw to cross cut 2x4's.
>
> > It's a well thought out design.
>
> > Enjoy.
>
> > Lew- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Too many fasteners and they're tough on saw blades.. I built a
set of ponies with too many screws in it and decided to pull the
screws and use 1/4" dowels, worked great. After the glue set up....
Good for inspiration though. I like my ponies at 36" or so. I
have one set at 42"
RP
xparatrooper wrote:
...
> plus a decent chunk of 2x12? at least that's what it looks like from
> the diagram...
optical delusion...
The angle is such that the opening between the lower lengthwise pieces
is occluded. It's two pieces lengthwise w/ underneath the two short
sections w/ a cross-piece at either end above.
Would be pretty heavy overall and top heavy too boot and the gaps rather
inconvenient it seems to me if built to the dimensions given. Only 3"
in the lengthwise one meaning a tubafor won't lay flat and two on edge
may/may not fit given the tolerances.
I think I'll stay w/ a straight ol' 'horse instead...
--
In article <[email protected]>,
Lew Hodgett <[email protected]> wrote:
>http://tinyurl.com/moplnx
>
>A saw horse design that first appeared in Mother Earth many years ago
>as a $6 saw horse.
>
>If you follow the cut list exactly, you get a saw horse from two
>2x4's, some saw dust and not much else.
>
>Have built several.
>
>One can be used along with a circular saw to cross cut 2x4's.
>
>It's a well thought out design.
>
>Enjoy.
>
>Lew
>
>
It is a nice design. I believe I also saw a similar design in
ShopNotes magazine - about 6 times.
--
Better to be stuck up in a tree than tied to one.
Larry Wasserman - Baltimore Maryland - lwasserm(a)sdf. lonestar.org
In article <de6c230f-60a3-4770-b02c-e7ebdcab4a5d@d37g2000yqm.googlegroups.com>,
[email protected] <[email protected]> wrote:
>On Jul 12, 4:34 pm, [email protected] (Larry W) wrote:
>
>> It is a nice design. I believe I also saw a similar design in
>> ShopNotes magazine - about 6 times.
>
>An excellent reason for Lew not to share with folks that might not
>have seen them.
>
>Shame on you, Lew. Save your good deeds and efforts until you run
>them by old Larry for approval.
>
>Robert
My intention was to poke fun at ShopNotes, not Lew!
--
There is always an easy solution to every human problem -- neat,
plausible, and wrong." (H L Mencken)
Larry Wasserman - Baltimore Maryland - lwasserm(a)sdf. lonestar. org
On Mon, 12 Jul 2010 19:35:16 -0700 (PDT), "[email protected]"
<[email protected]> wrote the following:
>On Jul 12, 4:34 pm, [email protected] (Larry W) wrote:
>
>> It is a nice design. I believe I also saw a similar design in
>> ShopNotes magazine - about 6 times.
>
>An excellent reason for Lew not to share with folks that might not
>have seen them.
>
>Shame on you, Lew. Save your good deeds and efforts until you run
>them by old Larry for approval.
Damned straight!
P.S: Gee, can't I have an opinion, Robert?
--
EXPLETIVE: A balm, usually applied verbally in hindsight,
which somehow eases those pains and indignities following
our every deficiency in foresight.
On Mon, 12 Jul 2010 00:14:27 -0700, "Lew Hodgett"
<[email protected]> wrote the following:
>DUH!
>
>It's three 2x4's, not two dummy.
So they weigh 25 pounds each and you can't stack 'em. Pass.
For me, the limitations outweigh the benefits.
--
EXPLETIVE: A balm, usually applied verbally in hindsight,
which somehow eases those pains and indignities following
our every deficiency in foresight.