I was looking at parts diagram for a 2002 Unisaw that I located that
didn't have a blade guard or splitter. I was surprised. From the parts
diagram it looks like a real pain to remove the splitter (2 screws,
sideways?). Not only that it would cost $150 to obtain this part.
Maybe I've already deduced why it's "not present"?
Thee may be value in a riving knife instead? FWIW, this saw has a
Unifence that didn't move as smoothly as other fences I've seen, it
needed to be "palm tapped"--but that detail doesn't seem so critical.
Maybe it just needs wax? It locked solid however (though it is Aluminum
and may flex a little--you can see I've been reading! ;) )
Looks like it may either be this saw or a new Grizzly G0691. Does
Grizzly have a "great feeling" fence or just so-so? After all is said
and done, the cost of delivery of both saws is about the same(which
improves the price of the Grizzly, relatively speaking).
Cheers,
Bill
On Wednesday, November 27, 2013 9:47:25 PM UTC-6, Bill wrote:
> I should read the manual too, because I learned some things while I was =
scanning it. In particular that the blades should be locked before the saw =
is turned on.=20
And don't torque the lock knobs (height and angle) really tight. Firm tigh=
tening, but not super tight. You'll learn and get the feel for sufficient=
tightening. With my older '81 saw, the "tightening" of the heigth knob h=
as worn, a bit, probably from over tightening.
Three finger firm tightening, if this defines my experience, reasonably.
Sonny
On 12/17/2013 8:54 PM, Bill wrote:
> Bill wrote:
>> woodchucker wrote:
>>>
>>> Bill, while not much better than what Sonny had, I like the hood
>>> better. Not the arm.. I think if you marry Sonny's and this together
>>> you would likely come out with a nice unit.
>>> You might even marry some pvc into the support arm (along with the
>>> pipe for some dust extraction).
>>>
>>> See the alt binaries.
>>>
>> I agree that the 2" dust collection is most-surely superior to the
>> "trim attachment. For former design used 3/8" Lexan too (compared to
>> 1/8"). It seems like it would even work better if the vacuum hose is
>> attached over the rear of the blade.
>>
>> Barring a ceiling attachment, it seems like 2 separate configurations
>> are required to avoid most conflicts (one from the left, and one from
>> the right). Furthermore, it should be fast and easy to alternate
>> between them.
>>
>> And it might use EMT since I have 4 or 5 pieces laying on the floor! : )
>> Imagine a giant C-Clamp with a "blade guard hood" attached to it.
>> Maybe the C could just be "swung" out of the way? As many say, "The
>> devil is in the details...".
>>
>> Bill
>
> There is some inspiration to be gleaned from the one of this page of
> Grizzly's catalog (bottom of page):
> http://www.grizzly.com/catalog/2013/Main/13
>
Yes with one exception, the dust collection to the rear of the blade is
useless. Start using your saw, and you will see 20% of the dust heads
toward you, and the rest to the cabinet. I never have any dust thrown
toward the outfeed area.
--
Jeff
Bill <[email protected]> wrote:
> I was looking at parts diagram for a 2002 Unisaw that I located that
> didn't have a blade guard or splitter.
>
> Thee may be value in a riving knife instead? FWIW, this saw has a
> Unifence that didn't move as smoothly as other fences I've seen, it
> needed to be "palm tapped"--but that detail doesn't seem so critical.
> Maybe it just needs wax? It locked solid however (though it is Aluminum
> and may flex a little--you can see I've been reading! ;)
Don't let the Unifence deter you. Very flexible:
http://www.amazon.com/Uni-t-fence-Table-Fence-Peachtree-Woodworking/dp/B001LYHYH6
Works great with the delta Unifence. Been using one for ten years and
recommend it. Great for jigs and easy add ons, like sacrificial fences.
Only caveat is that the Unifence doesn't work well with "hold downs" (board
buddies), which I don't use in any event.
--
www.ewoodshop.com (Mobile)
Swingman <[email protected]> wrote:
> Bill <[email protected]> wrote:
>> I was looking at parts diagram for a 2002 Unisaw that I located that
>> didn't have a blade guard or splitter. I was surprised. From the parts
>> diagram it looks like a real pain to remove the splitter (2 screws,
>> sideways?). Not only that it would cost $150 to obtain this part.
>> Maybe I've already deduced why it's "not present"?
>>
>> Thee may be value in a riving knife instead? FWIW, this saw has a
>> Unifence that didn't move as smoothly as other fences I've seen, it
>> needed to be "palm tapped"--but that detail doesn't seem so critical.
>> Maybe it just needs wax? It locked solid however (though it is Aluminum
>> and may flex a little--you can see I've been reading! ;) )
>>
>> Looks like it may either be this saw or a new Grizzly G0691. Does
>> Grizzly have a "great feeling" fence or just so-so? After all is said
>> and done, the cost of delivery of both saws is about the same(which
>> improves the price of the Grizzly, relatively speaking).
>
> Model number? Lots of different Unisaws in the early nineties.
>
-Since- the early nineties.
--
www.ewoodshop.com (Mobile)
Bill <[email protected]> wrote:
> Bill wrote:
>. He got he out of a "tough jam". I thanked him and tried to hand him
> $100, buy him a tank or two of gas, etc. but he would only take $5 for
> gas. A nice guy who made a real difference, like many of you folks.
>
Great story ... this country is full of folks like that, you just don't
hear about them on the evening news. Sounds like a great start to
Thanksgiving story. Count those blessings.
--
www.ewoodshop.com (Mobile)
On Tuesday, December 17, 2013 4:27:16 PM UTC-6, Bill wrote:
> Sonny, Thank you for the download! >> >
YW. Having to download 8 issues of ShopNotes, for just a few pages, seems impractical. Then, some of the left edge of the pages (discussion), on that download, were blurred.
Maybe Jeff can find something better, if Leon doesn't beat him to it.
If you wait a bit, after I win the MegaMillions pot, I'll buy you a blade guard of your choice, tomorrow.
Sonny
On Wednesday, November 27, 2013 6:33:43 PM UTC-6, Bill wrote:
> Bill wrote: > I was looking at parts diagram for a 2002 Unisaw. <snip> It=
just takes one other person to makes an auction difficult, and he was ther=
e (he probably thinking the same thing)! We had to go from $500 to $1050 be=
fore I convinced this person I was pretty serious about getting a saw! And =
that's the dollar amount I payed--$1050+10% +7% (sales tax), in case anyone=
is curious. I felt like I didn't want to do any more saw shopping--and thi=
s one was only about 5 miles from home--so I thought beforehand that it was=
n't going to get any easier. I met a kind person who helped me get the saw =
home on his trailer--I had talked with him for 10 or 15 minutes before they=
got to auctioning the machinery. While I was collecting parts in a plastic=
garbage bag that I brought with me for the occasion, he asked me if I need=
ed any help moving the saw. And I said yes, please. And he said, where's yo=
ur truck. And I said, I don't have a truck. Can we put in in yours?--I said=
I live close by and I will be glad to give you $100 to help me. His traile=
r featured a hand-powered winch-which was handy pulling it up and letting i=
t down some improvised ramps. He did a lot of work though, securing the saw=
. He got he out of a "tough jam". I thanked him and tried to hand him $100,=
buy him a tank or two of gas, etc. but he would only take $5 for gas. A ni=
ce guy who made a real difference, like many of you folks. Bill
The only problem I see with this post is that it's not a new thread, onto i=
tself. Purchasing a Unisaw, with the latest model Unifence/side table, mob=
ile base & motor cover deserves a thread all its own, with some more braggi=
ng and feel-good statements. *That extra moble base might be able to be re=
trofitted & used with a pending(?) jointer, too.
I'm excited for you, Bill. ^5
Sonny
Bill <[email protected]> wrote:
> I was looking at parts diagram for a 2002 Unisaw that I located that
> didn't have a blade guard or splitter. I was surprised. From the parts
> diagram it looks like a real pain to remove the splitter (2 screws,
> sideways?). Not only that it would cost $150 to obtain this part.
> Maybe I've already deduced why it's "not present"?
>
> Thee may be value in a riving knife instead? FWIW, this saw has a
> Unifence that didn't move as smoothly as other fences I've seen, it
> needed to be "palm tapped"--but that detail doesn't seem so critical.
> Maybe it just needs wax? It locked solid however (though it is Aluminum
> and may flex a little--you can see I've been reading! ;) )
>
> Looks like it may either be this saw or a new Grizzly G0691. Does
> Grizzly have a "great feeling" fence or just so-so? After all is said
> and done, the cost of delivery of both saws is about the same(which
> improves the price of the Grizzly, relatively speaking).
Model number? Lots of different Unisaws in the early nineties.
--
www.ewoodshop.com (Mobile)
On Thursday, November 28, 2013 11:02:29 AM UTC-6, Bill wrote:
> Can I apply lithium grease on the internal parts corresponding to the hei=
ght/tilt wheels of the saw, or is there something more suitable for this pu=
rpose?=20
Applying a lubricant to the large gears or teeth of the gears? There seems=
to be some difference of opinions about lubrcating those teeth/gears, simi=
lar to lubricating the threads on a wood vise screw.
Some oils or grease tend to collect sawdust, adding to any potential proble=
m for smooth operation. Clean, substance free gears/teeth or threads seems=
to work just fine, for me, though my saw's angle gear squeaks like hell, w=
hen cranking it. I suspect it's the shaft/support that squeaks, not the te=
eth/gears.=20
I don't lubricate my gears and sawdust collects on them, anyway, but it's n=
ot "stuck" on. It's a lot easier blowing the dust off, with the air hose, =
if the dust is not stuck on by a lubricant. In my case, sawdust collecting=
on the gears/teeth is much more pronounced on the saw that is not attached=
to the DC.
I would suggest you not lubricate the gears. If your experience suggests o=
therwise, then try lubricating and compare the results.
Sonny
Bill wrote:
> I was looking at parts diagram for a 2002 Unisaw that I located that
> didn't have a blade guard or splitter. I was surprised.
-------------------------------------------------------
http://tinyurl.com/3uxteay
Have used this device on a Unisaw and it not only functional, but easy
to use.
Easy to install, easy to remove when you don't need it.
Lew
On 11/28/2013 3:55 PM, [email protected] wrote:
> On Thu, 28 Nov 2013 14:56:25 -0500, Bill <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>>
>> Towards that goal, I noticed that Menards has this miter saw stand on
>> sale tomorrow for $29.99:
>> http://www.menards.com/main/see-more/dat-two-day-sale/portamate-miter-saw-stand/p-2180574-c-13916.htm
>
> I'd just make sure it's plenty solid. It doesn't say how far it
> extends but that's another important consideration.
>
> I bought one of these several years ago for my HF saw, when I had no
> place to put it or the saw. I found it at a BORG for $100. ;-) I've
> seen them free with a saw but I bought a Bosch, eventually. I plan on
> a stationary table for it, using it (and the HF saw) for portable use.
>
> http://dewalt.com/tools/machinery-miter-saw-workstations-dwx723.aspx
The one I wound up getting was the StableMate Plus 100(?). Similar
design to the HTC PortaMate but, AFAIK, made by a totally different
outfit. DAGS and you can see that they (PortaMate/StableMate area
similar. Footprint of the Stablemate when deployed appears a bit better
(as in stable) compared to the PortaMate but the StableMate was
EXTREMELY stable to point, perhaps, of overkill.
The mounting system for the Stablemate was very well done making it
quite easy to mount/dismount the saw for transport or storage and the
stand itself has a pretty low profile whether being stood on end or just
laying on the floor. Can't recall now if I got a super bargain when I
bought it (gotta be 8 years back)or if they've just gone nuts in
pricing. Looks like it'll cost you ~ $200 for one today. Don't think
that I paid much over $115 through Amazon.
>>>Towards that goal, I noticed that Menards has this miter saw stand
>>>on
>>> sale tomorrow for $29.99:
>>> http://www.menards.com/main/see-more/dat-two-day-sale/portamate-miter-saw-stand/p-2180574-c-13916.htm
-----------------------------------------------
Norm to the rescue.
http://tinyurl.com/mhgw52m
Lew
On 12/17/2013 11:24 AM, Sonny wrote:
> On Monday, December 16, 2013 11:14:43 PM UTC-6, Bill wrote:
>> Bill wrote: > ShopNotes "Dust-Free Blade Guard" in 1997 (Volume 16, Issue 92).
>
>
> Depending on your download speed, it may take a few minutes to download the whole issue.
>
> http://metosexpo.free.fr/extra/wood_ebooks/shopnotes/ShopNotes%20-%20Vol.%2087%20to%2095/ShopNotes%20-%20Vol.%2087%20to%2095/Shopnotes%20%2392%20(Vol%2016)%20-%20Before%20&%20After%20Shop%20Makeover.pdf
>
> Sonny
>
Bill,
I'll see if I can find another article for you. I don't remember what
mag, but if I still have it, I'll scan and send it.
Made of plexiglass or lexan which allows you to see in, and includes a
full 2" vac.. The Shopnotes looks like a crevise tool which I don't
believe would be as good, I could be wrong.
--
Jeff
On 12/17/2013 11:24 AM, Sonny wrote:
> On Monday, December 16, 2013 11:14:43 PM UTC-6, Bill wrote:
>> Bill wrote: > ShopNotes "Dust-Free Blade Guard" in 1997 (Volume 16, Issue 92).
>
>
> Depending on your download speed, it may take a few minutes to download the whole issue.
>
> http://metosexpo.free.fr/extra/wood_ebooks/shopnotes/ShopNotes%20-%20Vol.%2087%20to%2095/ShopNotes%20-%20Vol.%2087%20to%2095/Shopnotes%20%2392%20(Vol%2016)%20-%20Before%20&%20After%20Shop%20Makeover.pdf
>
> Sonny
>
Bill,
I'll see if I can find another article for you. I don't remember what
mag, but if I still have it, I'll scan and send it.
Made of plexiglass or lexan which allows you to see in, and includes a
full 2" vac.. The Shopnotes looks like a crevise tool which I don't
believe would be as good, I could be wrong.
--
Jeff
"Bill" wrote:
> Thank you for extending my "universe" of materials (and building
> techniques)!
> Where I grew up, an I-beam really looked like an I-beam. I see that
> things are more complicated now!
-------------------------------------------------------
Dig out a strength of materials text, learn and understand the
following:
I^3 = (bh^3)/12 + 1/2(Ad^2)
It's the basis of all beam design and application.
Lew
Lew Hodgett wrote> :
> Dig out a strength of materials text, learn and understand the
> following:
> I^3 = (bh^3)/12 + 1/2(Ad^2)
> It's the basis of all beam design and application.
--------------------------------------------------------
"Bill" wrote:
> So are you saying that you didn't need to look it up??? : ) I
> trust you, I'm just curious.
-----------------------------------------------------
Alzheimers may be in my future but doesn't seem to have arrived yet.
Anyway, that formula was beat into me more than 50 years ago by
my structural prof who would begin his homework assignments with
"Gentlemen, put on your coolie hats and have fun tonight".
You don't forget that experience.
Have fun.
Lew
On Thursday, December 19, 2013 11:03:27 AM UTC-6, k
Not to belabor the point but I think this discussion is worth having... If =
you're on the left side of the blade, aren't you tending to pinch the board=
into the blade when you're close to the end of a rip? On the right side of=
the fence, you're tending to push the side of the board that's against the=
fence rather than the side that's against the blade.
I would think the side one stands on is partially (high percentage) determi=
ned by whether the person is right handed or left handed and which side/pos=
ition is comfortable to the person. There is no correct or incorrect side,=
as per the saw or fence, itself.
Belaboring dust collection: My suggestion to Bill would be to not bother w=
ith dust collection above the table top, but do get a blade guard. If you =
were doing production work, there would be a good reason to have the dust c=
ollected above the blade. For hobby work, invest in a dust brush, broom & =
dust pan.... and wear goggles or a face shield, if the dust flies in your f=
ace. Your saw is mobile, so I'd suppose you may be using the saw near the =
garage door, or at least out in the open, convenient to clean up scattered =
dust from the top. If need be, add a dust port to the guard, later. For th=
e time being, get the saw in safe working order and start doing some woodwo=
rk. Spend the proposed dust collection money on lumber, for now.
Screw that dust port. Let's cut some boards.
Sonny
On 21 Dec 2013 05:48:45 GMT, Puckdropper
<puckdropper(at)yahoo(dot)com> wrote:
>Bill <[email protected]> wrote in
>news:[email protected]:
>
>*snip*
>
>>
>> Yes. Definitely. My edges of my blade guard hood won't be clean-
>enough
>> to sell at Walmart. The only edge that really count on my blade
>guard
>> hood are the ones that touch the wood. The rest are cosmetic. OTOH, I
>> was just reading how a board on a piece of furniture that *looks* like
>> it has been worked to be smooth is a sign of higher quality than a
>truly
>> smooth board.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Bill
>>
>
>Just slap a Duck Dynasty sticker on it. Walmart has tons of the stuff.
Not any more.
<http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2527204/Duck-Dynastys-multi-million-payday-Their-400m-empire-flourishes-amid-scandal-fans-flock-support-Phil-Robertson-Walmart-sells-merchandise.html>
On 12/19/2013 11:03 AM, [email protected] wrote:
> On Thu, 19 Dec 2013 00:36:45 -0600, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet>
> wrote:
>
>> On 12/18/2013 5:38 PM, Bill wrote:
>>> Leon wrote:
>>>> On 12/18/2013 10:48 AM, Bill wrote:
>>>>> Doug Miller wrote:
>>>>>> Bill <[email protected]> wrote in
>>>>>> news:[email protected]:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> There is some inspiration to be gleaned from the one of this page of
>>>>>>> Grizzly's catalog (bottom of page):
>>>>>>> http://www.grizzly.com/catalog/2013/Main/13
>>>>>> Dust hose attaches in the wrong place. To do any good at all, the dust
>>>>>> hose needs to attach at
>>>>>> the *front* of the blade guard, not the rear.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> That makes sense now. How could they have got that wrong (just
>>>>> rhetorical question)?
>>>>> Thanks Doug.
>>>>>
>>>>> Bill
>>>>
>>>> Well It may not be wrong, SawStop claims extreme efficiency with their
>>>> guard and the hose is at the rear. It all depends on the turbulence
>>>> and flow inside the guard.
>>>>
>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IJEi_lWGeLs
>>>
>>> Someone posted in the comments section of that video, that the person in
>>> the video is "standing on the wrong side of the fence". What do you think?
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Well he is out of the line of kick back if that happened. I say stand
>> out of direct line and where you feel most comfortable with maintaining
>> control. I am typically on the left side of the blade.
>
> Not to belabor the point but I think this discussion is worth
> having...
>
> If you're on the left side of the blade, aren't you tending to pinch
> the board into the blade when you're close to the end of a rip? On
> the right side of the fence, you're tending to push the side of the
> board that's against the fence rather than the side that's against the
> blade.
>
>
Not sure I understand pinch the board into the blade.
But I feed with my right hand and hold the work down with the left. My
right hand is grabbing the right side of the board and pushing until the
end is on the table top, then I push directly from the rear. The left
hand keeps the work pushed down and against the fence.
I may or may not use a push device depending on the width of the rip.
On 12/19/2013 1:42 PM, Sonny wrote:
> On Thursday, December 19, 2013 11:03:27 AM UTC-6, k
> Not to belabor the point but I think this discussion is worth having... If you're on the left side of the blade, aren't you tending to pinch the board into the blade when you're close to the end of a rip? On the right side of the fence, you're tending to push the side of the board that's against the fence rather than the side that's against the blade.
>
> I would think the side one stands on is partially (high percentage) determined by whether the person is right handed or left handed and which side/position is comfortable to the person. There is no correct or incorrect side, as per the saw or fence, itself.
>
> Belaboring dust collection: My suggestion to Bill would be to not bother with dust collection above the table top, but do get a blade guard. If you were doing production work, there would be a good reason to have the dust collected above the blade. For hobby work, invest in a dust brush, broom & dust pan.... and wear goggles or a face shield, if the dust flies in your face. Your saw is mobile, so I'd suppose you may be using the saw near the garage door, or at least out in the open, convenient to clean up scattered dust from the top. If need be, add a dust port to the guard, later. For the time being, get the saw in safe working order and start doing some woodwork. Spend the proposed dust collection money on lumber, for now.
>
> Screw that dust port. Let's cut some boards.
>
> Sonny
>
I agree, the dust port should be an afterthought.
I am not big on the guard either. Splitter yes, riving knife better.
If your allergies do bother you you can add the dust collection later.
--
Jeff
Sonny wrote:
> Belaboring dust collection: My suggestion to Bill would be to not bother with dust collection above the table top, but do get a blade guard. If you were doing production work, there would be a good reason to have the dust collected above the blade. For hobby work, invest in a dust brush, broom & dust pan.... and wear goggles or a face shield, if the dust flies in your face. Your saw is mobile, so I'd suppose you may be using the saw near the garage door, or at least out in the open, convenient to clean up scattered dust from the top. If need be, add a dust port to the guard, later. For the time being, get the saw in safe working order and start doing some woodwork. Spend the proposed dust collection money on lumber, for now.
>
> Screw that dust port. Let's cut some boards.
>
> Sonny
Yes, I agree with your spirit. The morning I am thinking of a structure
based on a "quilt rack" model--upside down "T" ends, as legs, with a
mast of of 3/4" steel square tubing.
To that I can attach a Loxan polycarbonate box (blade cover), with
hinged front, sides and back--like the box in this video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cxZOO_zcpNM
As you suggest, I can always improve upon it.
A dust brush came with the saw, and I already have the broom, dust pan
and face shield! : )
On Sat, 21 Dec 2013 13:44:57 -0500, Bill <[email protected]>
wrote:
>Puckdropper wrote:
>> Bill <[email protected]> wrote in
>> news:[email protected]:
>>
>> *snip*
>>
>>> Yes. Definitely. My edges of my blade guard hood won't be clean-
>> enough
>>> to sell at Walmart. The only edge that really count on my blade
>> guard
>>> hood are the ones that touch the wood. The rest are cosmetic. OTOH, I
>>> was just reading how a board on a piece of furniture that *looks* like
>>> it has been worked to be smooth is a sign of higher quality than a
>> truly
>>> smooth board.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Bill
>>>
>> Just slap a Duck Dynasty sticker on it. Walmart has tons of the stuff.
>
>I haven't seen the show. But I have observed the recent "controversy"
>surrounding it. As for me, put an Afflack duck sticker on it, and I'll
>buy all you can get! : ) Actually, to be honest, "Flo" may rank
>higher on my list of celebrity endorsers than the duck... But lets not
>get side-tracked.
One of the guys at work ran into her at a Halloween party. Yep,
dressed as Flo. She won best costume (though I think it's cheating
;-).
[email protected] wrote:
> If you're on the left side of the blade, aren't you tending to pinch
> the board into the blade when you're close to the end of a rip?
No.
>On
> the right side of the fence, you're tending to push the side of the
> board that's against the fence rather than the side that's against the
> blade.
I beg to differ. You "tend" to do no such thing. You might do such as a
matter of practice, but that is very different from you "tend" to do. I do
not think there is any such tendency to push left or right no matter which
side you stand on. I know that I am always pushing into the fence.
--
-Mike-
[email protected]
Sonny wrote:
>
> Belaboring dust collection: My suggestion to Bill would be to not
> bother with dust collection above the table top, but do get a blade
> guard. If you were doing production work, there would be a good
> reason to have the dust collected above the blade. For hobby work,
> invest in a dust brush, broom & dust pan....
Buy that man a beer! It's about time there was some common sense spoken
here about dust collection!
> and wear goggles or a
> face shield, if the dust flies in your face. Your saw is mobile, so
> I'd suppose you may be using the saw near the garage door, or at
> least out in the open, convenient to clean up scattered dust from the
> top. If need be, add a dust port to the guard, later. For the time
> being, get the saw in safe working order and start doing some
> woodwork. Spend the proposed dust collection money on lumber, for
> now.
That's the best damned dust collection advise that has shown up in this
forum.
>
> Screw that dust port. Let's cut some boards.
>
Preach it brother!
--
-Mike-
[email protected]
Bill wrote:
> Sonny wrote:
>> Belaboring dust collection: My suggestion to Bill would be to not
>> bother with dust collection above the table top, but do get a blade
>> guard. If you were doing production work, there would be a good
>> reason to have the dust collected above the blade. For hobby work,
>> invest in a dust brush, broom & dust pan.... and wear goggles or a
>> face shield, if the dust flies in your face. Your saw is mobile, so
>> I'd suppose you may be using the saw near the garage door, or at
>> least out in the open, convenient to clean up scattered dust from
>> the top. If need be, add a dust port to the guard, later. For the
>> time being, get the saw in safe working order and start doing some
>> woodwork. Spend the proposed dust collection money on lumber, for
>> now. Screw that dust port. Let's cut some boards.
>>
>> Sonny
>
> Yes, I agree with your spirit. The morning I am thinking of a
> structure based on a "quilt rack" model--upside down "T" ends, as
> legs, with a mast of of 3/4" steel square tubing.
> To that I can attach a Loxan polycarbonate box (blade cover), with
> hinged front, sides and back--like the box in this video:
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cxZOO_zcpNM
>
> As you suggest, I can always improve upon it.
>
Get cutting with that saw Bill! If you keep this up you'll be longer
cutting a board on it than you were wiring your garage lights. Go ahead -
stick a piece of wood in that thing... you'll love the feel of it.
--
-Mike-
[email protected]
Leon wrote:
> On 12/19/2013 12:58 PM, Bill wrote:
>> Sonny wrote:
>>> Belaboring dust collection: My suggestion to Bill would be to not
>>> bother with dust collection above the table top, but do get a blade
>>> guard. If you were doing production work, there would be a good
>>> reason to have the dust collected above the blade. For hobby work,
>>> invest in a dust brush, broom & dust pan.... and wear goggles or a
>>> face shield, if the dust flies in your face. Your saw is mobile, so
>>> I'd suppose you may be using the saw near the garage door, or at least
>>> out in the open, convenient to clean up scattered dust from the top.
>>> If need be, add a dust port to the guard, later. For the time being,
>>> get the saw in safe working order and start doing some woodwork.
>>> Spend the proposed dust collection money on lumber, for now.
>>>
>>> Screw that dust port. Let's cut some boards.
>>>
>>> Sonny
>>
>> Yes, I agree with your spirit. The morning I am thinking of a structure
>> based on a "quilt rack" model--upside down "T" ends, as legs, with a
>> mast of of 3/4" steel square tubing.
>> To that I can attach a Loxan polycarbonate box (blade cover), with
>> hinged front, sides and back--like the box in this video:
>>
>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cxZOO_zcpNM
>>
>> As you suggest, I can always improve upon it.
>>
>> A dust brush came with the saw, and I already have the broom, dust pan
>> and face shield! : )
>
>
> Bill here is what my woodworking has evolved down to.
>
> I used to over think the possibilities and the what if's.
>
> With experience I have learned to gravitated towards not over thinking
> and simply building something. You will learn what has more
> importance to you as you become more experienced and can adjust
> methods and equipment accordingly. The important thing is to actually
> create something and don't worry too much about the dust. Chances are
> if you try to prevent sawdust you might spend way too much time doing
> so and maybe not be needing to do so. Assess your needs after you make
> your mess. ;!)
The "mess" is not a concern at all. It just makes sense to use a blade
cover. Like krw mentioned, my "O-Rings" would crack up here! I spent
several hours yesterday thinking about blade covers. Some
"engineering-like" thinking too.
Folks act like I'm sitting on my hands. Evidently, I need to learn to
work Lexan Polycarbonate! It's sort of like wood, except you can see
through it!
Bill
woodchucker wrote:
>
> I agree, the dust port should be an afterthought.
> I am not big on the guard either. Splitter yes, riving knife better.
>
> If your allergies do bother you you can add the dust collection later.
>
Yes, just need a blade guard. Was thinking "quilt-rack model"--2
(upside down)
"T"-shaped legs with a length of steel square tubing, or equivalent,
between them.
To that a reasonably simple blade cover fashioned from Lexan
Polycarbonate would be attached.
A disk/belt sander (why did I think of Mike Marlow?), would probably
shape it nicely.
Bill
Bill wrote:
> The morning I am thinking of a structure based on a "quilt rack"
> model--upside down "T" ends, as legs, with a mast of of 3/4" steel
> square tubing.
> To that I can attach a Loxan polycarbonate box (blade cover), with
> hinged front, sides and back--like the box in this video:
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cxZOO_zcpNM
>
> As you suggest, I can always improve upon it.
>
Consider a 72" long beam consisting of 2" by 2" square steel tubing,
1/8" thick, fixed at each end. Assume I attach a 3' beam right in the
middle, perhaps cantilevered, to which my blade guard is affixed. How
much "rigidness" have I bought myself, as far as the beam is concerned?
I believe we are talking about the "strength" of the steel tubing. I
realize that if I shorten the 72" beam, the rigidness will improve, but
how is it doing so far? By comparison, lesser material options that are
available would probably seem flimsy, no? To provide a more complete
picture, I intend that this beam will span an outfeed table.
Thanks!
Bill
Bill wrote:
> Bill wrote:
>> The morning I am thinking of a structure based on a "quilt rack"
>> model--upside down "T" ends, as legs, with a mast of of 3/4" steel
>> square tubing.
>> To that I can attach a Loxan polycarbonate box (blade cover), with
>> hinged front, sides and back--like the box in this video:
>>
>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cxZOO_zcpNM
>>
>> As you suggest, I can always improve upon it.
>>
>
>
> Consider a 72" long beam consisting of 2" by 2" square steel tubing,
> 1/8" thick, fixed at each end. Assume I attach a 3' beam right in the
> middle, perhaps cantilevered, to which my blade guard is affixed.
> How much "rigidness" have I bought myself, as far as the beam is
> concerned? I believe we are talking about the "strength" of the steel
> tubing. I realize that if I shorten the 72" beam, the rigidness will
> improve, but how is it doing so far? By comparison, lesser material
> options that are available would probably seem flimsy, no? To
> provide a more complete picture, I intend that this beam will span an
> outfeed table.
>
> Thanks!
> Bill
A related question is "Will it sag with time?" (like a 2by4 hanging in
the same manner would?)
Maybe I need to use an I-beam (that's a joke!) Maybe a small I-beam
(that's not a joke!)
Bill
Bill wrote:
> Bill wrote:
>> Bill wrote:
>>> The morning I am thinking of a structure based on a "quilt rack"
>>> model--upside down "T" ends, as legs, with a mast of of 3/4" steel
>>> square tubing.
>>> To that I can attach a Loxan polycarbonate box (blade cover), with
>>> hinged front, sides and back--like the box in this video:
>>>
>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cxZOO_zcpNM
>>>
>>> As you suggest, I can always improve upon it.
>>>
>>
>>
>> Consider a 72" long beam consisting of 2" by 2" square steel tubing,
>> 1/8" thick, fixed at each end. Assume I attach a 3' beam right in
>> the middle, perhaps cantilevered, to which my blade guard is affixed.
>> How much "rigidness" have I bought myself, as far as the beam is
>> concerned? I believe we are talking about the "strength" of the steel
>> tubing. I realize that if I shorten the 72" beam, the rigidness will
>> improve, but how is it doing so far? By comparison, lesser material
>> options that are available would probably seem flimsy, no? To
>> provide a more complete picture, I intend that this beam will span an
>> outfeed table.
>>
>> Thanks!
>> Bill
>
> A related question is "Will it sag with time?" (like a 2by4 hanging in
> the same manner would?)
> Maybe I need to use an I-beam (that's a joke!) Maybe a small I-beam
> (that's not a joke!)
>
I have to admit Bill that I'm lost with your ideas. Having said that - I
can't imagine any need for the monster you're contemplating, just to fab a
blade guard. I can't say for sure because like I said - I'm kinda lost
here, but I'm guessing you're over engineering the hell out of this.
--
-Mike-
[email protected]
Mike Marlow wrote:
> Bill wrote:
>> Bill wrote:
>>> Bill wrote:
>>>> The morning I am thinking of a structure based on a "quilt rack"
>>>> model--upside down "T" ends, as legs, with a mast of of 3/4" steel
>>>> square tubing.
>>>> To that I can attach a Loxan polycarbonate box (blade cover), with
>>>> hinged front, sides and back--like the box in this video:
>>>>
>>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cxZOO_zcpNM
>>>>
>>>> As you suggest, I can always improve upon it.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Consider a 72" long beam consisting of 2" by 2" square steel tubing,
>>> 1/8" thick, fixed at each end. Assume I attach a 3' beam right in
>>> the middle, perhaps cantilevered, to which my blade guard is affixed.
>>> How much "rigidness" have I bought myself, as far as the beam is
>>> concerned? I believe we are talking about the "strength" of the steel
>>> tubing. I realize that if I shorten the 72" beam, the rigidness will
>>> improve, but how is it doing so far? By comparison, lesser material
>>> options that are available would probably seem flimsy, no? To
>>> provide a more complete picture, I intend that this beam will span an
>>> outfeed table.
>>>
>>> Thanks!
>>> Bill
>> A related question is "Will it sag with time?" (like a 2by4 hanging in
>> the same manner would?)
>> Maybe I need to use an I-beam (that's a joke!) Maybe a small I-beam
>> (that's not a joke!)
>>
> I have to admit Bill that I'm lost with your ideas. Having said that - I
> can't imagine any need for the monster you're contemplating, just to fab a
> blade guard. I can't say for sure because like I said - I'm kinda lost
> here, but I'm guessing you're over engineering the hell out of this.
>
Think of it as a "Simply-Supported Overhead Gantry-Crane Supporting
Scissored Linkage To A Polycarbonate Blade Guard, Constructed With The
Help Of My First Homemade Router Table--My Shrine To Table Saw
Safety". Except for "router table", most/all of the above engineering
and material terminology and technology is brand new to me. Maybe when
I'm done, I'll have something besides a blade guard?
Thank you for your reply! I like your use of the word "monster" ;
) Though, if it gets attached to the ceiling some day, it may appear
less awesome... Thus far, it is only coming together on paper. As I
mentioned in an earlier post, there are 3 parts: Support, linkage, and
guard. I appreciate better now why folks "over-built" things, back in
the days of yesteryear...
Cheers,
Bill
One can usually test the span, and or get a sense if there is any
bending......
It sounds like with square tubing, and 6' you have little flex.
Many engineered beams take advantage of light weight plywood for the
strength
similar to "I" beam trusses....
If a person were to use that in combination with the tubing, no flexing
would happen.
Again, it is a tough picture to see.......
john
"Bill" wrote in message news:[email protected]...
Bill wrote:
> The morning I am thinking of a structure based on a "quilt rack"
> model--upside down "T" ends, as legs, with a mast of of 3/4" steel square
> tubing.
> To that I can attach a Loxan polycarbonate box (blade cover), with hinged
> front, sides and back--like the box in this video:
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cxZOO_zcpNM
>
> As you suggest, I can always improve upon it.
>
Consider a 72" long beam consisting of 2" by 2" square steel tubing,
1/8" thick, fixed at each end. Assume I attach a 3' beam right in the
middle, perhaps cantilevered, to which my blade guard is affixed. How
much "rigidness" have I bought myself, as far as the beam is concerned?
I believe we are talking about the "strength" of the steel tubing. I
realize that if I shorten the 72" beam, the rigidness will improve, but
how is it doing so far? By comparison, lesser material options that are
available would probably seem flimsy, no? To provide a more complete
picture, I intend that this beam will span an outfeed table.
Thanks!
Bill
Bill wrote:
> Think of it as a "Simply-Supported Overhead Gantry-Crane Supporting
> Scissored Linkage To A Polycarbonate Blade Guard, Constructed With The
> Help Of My First Homemade Router Table--My Shrine To Table Saw
> Safety". Except for "router table", most/all of the above
> engineering and material terminology and technology is brand new to
> me. Maybe when I'm done, I'll have something besides a blade guard?
>
Oh yeah - I should have gone back and looked that web site you reference a
while ago, but I was too lazy to look it up. I forgot about the scissor
links. Way overkill in my opinion but you have to remember - I don't use a
blade guard so my opinion might not be all that relevant. I'm the kind of
guy that likes mobility, so I would not design an overhead mount myself - if
I were to use a blade guard. I'd go with something that was affixed to my
saw so no matter where my saw was, the guard was there - ready to go. But
then again - I have a table saw that I stow and move out when I need it, so
your world may be different with that big ol' cabinet saw of yours. (little
bit of envy there...)
> Thank you for your reply! I like your use of the word "monster" ;
> ) Though, if it gets attached to the ceiling some day, it may
> appear less awesome... Thus far, it is only coming together on
> paper. As I mentioned in an earlier post, there are 3 parts: Support,
> linkage, and guard. I appreciate better now why folks "over-built"
> things, back in the days of yesteryear...
We've all overbuilt. Most of us justify it in our own minds, but in the end
I really believe it's because we really did not understand properly, things
like strength of materials, etc. So - we overbuild 'cause it don't hurt.
--
-Mike-
[email protected]
jloomis wrote:
> One can usually test the span, and or get a sense if there is any
> bending......
> It sounds like with square tubing, and 6' you have little flex.
Not from a strength of materials perspective, but from a practical
experience perspective... I'd agree with John. I can't see 2" square tube
going anywhere in a 6' span. More importantly, you are not carrying any
weight at all on that tubing, and you are not subjecting it to any forces at
all, so I just can't see it creating any problems for you. For what you are
doing, you might be able to get away with half that strength - but I'm not
advocating that. It's just a thought.
> Many engineered beams take advantage of light weight plywood for the
> strength
> similar to "I" beam trusses....
> If a person were to use that in combination with the tubing, no
> flexing would happen.
I'd have to believe that a 2" I-beam would offer all the support necessary
all by itself. Think of weights like those found on barn doors which can
use either an I-beam of similar size or and open box channel, or even a
C-channel which has to be the weakest of the options. They are carrying
many, many, many more times the weight - even allowing for the fact that
they carry it over two rollers, and they last out in the elements for
decades. I'd still find the 2" box to be way more than adequate though.
Maybe even a proper level of overkill.
--
-Mike-
[email protected]
Mike Marlow wrote:
> Bill wrote:
> I appreciate better now why folks "over-built"
> things, back in the days of yesteryear...
> We've all overbuilt. Most of us justify it in our own minds, but in the end
> I really believe it's because we really did not understand properly, things
> like strength of materials, etc. So - we overbuild 'cause it don't hurt.
>
>
Yes, I doubt that terrible things would happen if the blade guard got
pushed against the moving blade, but I am not anxious to find out. When
I compare 1"and 2" square steel tubing, in my mind, there is little
doubt about which seems more appropriate. The kind that is "perforated"
(having holes along the edges) may simplify things for me when I settle
on a good way to attach my crossbeam.
Picking up a basic knowledge about steel tubing and polycarbonate is
part of the "fun". I visited Henry Ford's personal workshop at The
Henry Ford Museum last summer. Now, at least from the looks of things,
Henry Ford was a guy who liked to play with heavy machinery! His
personal workshop was so big he probably had at least 6 assistants to
help him run it--or at least a few to maintain it. All of the machines
were belt driven, powered by steam. The people who work there now are
not knowledgeable about what the machines do. Mike Marlow, you gotta
think Henry Ford was your "get things done" sort of guy! He must have
been the "Lew" of his day.
Bill
jloomis wrote:
> One can usually test the span, and or get a sense if there is any
> bending......
> It sounds like with square tubing, and 6' you have little flex.
> Many engineered beams take advantage of light weight plywood for the
> strength
> similar to "I" beam trusses....
> If a person were to use that in combination with the tubing, no
> flexing would happen.
> Again, it is a tough picture to see.......
> john
>
> "
Thank you for extending my "universe" of materials (and building
techniques)!
Where I grew up, an I-beam really looked like an I-beam. I see that
things are more complicated now!
Bill
Lew Hodgett wrote:
> "Bill" wrote:
>> Thank you for extending my "universe" of materials (and building
>> techniques)!
>> Where I grew up, an I-beam really looked like an I-beam. I see that
>> things are more complicated now!
> -------------------------------------------------------
> Dig out a strength of materials text, learn and understand the
> following:
>
> I^3 = (bh^3)/12 + 1/2(Ad^2)
>
> It's the basis of all beam design and application.
So are you saying that you didn't need to look it up??? : ) I trust
you, I'm just curious.
I was doing okay on Wikipedia, until I ran into the units MPa.
>
> Lew
>
>
I spent the whole evening learning more about steel. %-)
As every Wrecker is surely aware, steel has lots of recipes and is comes
is sold in a variety of molecular patterns. I doubt you can get square
tube that is not annealed (A) in retail. Online, all I can do is "go
bigger". I'm up to 1/4" thick now, I just don't want it to
flex...lol I'm going to physically visit Lowes and actually hold some
in my hand, so I can get a better feeling for wall thicknesses.
If I was clever enough, I could probably back up a few steps and build a
wooden truss instead (and have fun doing it). I didn't know what a
"truss" was until John Loomis mentioned the term in an earlier post
yesterday. That is a great word for me to know for what I wish to
accomplish. Even if the tubing did flex, I truss could be use to firm
it up (as he suggested), which is reassuring, and reminds me of the
nature of all of our woodworking experiments.
I have no reason to rush this purchase. I tried to resolve it, but it
can wait. I think I'll take a break, and do some of my work for work!
Cheers,
Bill
>
Lew Hodgett wrote:
> Lew Hodgett wrote> :
>
>> Dig out a strength of materials text, learn and understand the
>> following:
>> I^3 = (bh^3)/12 + 1/2(Ad^2)
>> It's the basis of all beam design and application.
> --------------------------------------------------------
> "Bill" wrote:
>
>> So are you saying that you didn't need to look it up??? : ) I
>> trust you, I'm just curious.
> -----------------------------------------------------
> Alzheimers may be in my future but doesn't seem to have arrived yet.
>
> Anyway, that formula was beat into me more than 50 years ago by
> my structural prof who would begin his homework assignments with
> "Gentlemen, put on your coolie hats and have fun tonight".
>
> You don't forget that experience.
>
> Have fun.
>
> Lew
>
Here's a link in case anybody doesn't know what a coolie hat is:
http://www.shindigz.com/party/coolie-hat/pgp/p0333k?mr:referralID=0f6c771c-7ccc-11e3-9f1f-001b2166becc&utm_campaign=partysupplies-themepartysupplies-asianparty&utm_source=google_shopping&utm_medium=Feeds&utm_content=HATCSE&stumpstrackid=GFSZHATCSE
On 12/19/2013 12:58 PM, Bill wrote:
> Sonny wrote:
>> Belaboring dust collection: My suggestion to Bill would be to not
>> bother with dust collection above the table top, but do get a blade
>> guard. If you were doing production work, there would be a good
>> reason to have the dust collected above the blade. For hobby work,
>> invest in a dust brush, broom & dust pan.... and wear goggles or a
>> face shield, if the dust flies in your face. Your saw is mobile, so
>> I'd suppose you may be using the saw near the garage door, or at least
>> out in the open, convenient to clean up scattered dust from the top.
>> If need be, add a dust port to the guard, later. For the time being,
>> get the saw in safe working order and start doing some woodwork.
>> Spend the proposed dust collection money on lumber, for now.
>>
>> Screw that dust port. Let's cut some boards.
>>
>> Sonny
>
> Yes, I agree with your spirit. The morning I am thinking of a structure
> based on a "quilt rack" model--upside down "T" ends, as legs, with a
> mast of of 3/4" steel square tubing.
> To that I can attach a Loxan polycarbonate box (blade cover), with
> hinged front, sides and back--like the box in this video:
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cxZOO_zcpNM
>
> As you suggest, I can always improve upon it.
>
> A dust brush came with the saw, and I already have the broom, dust pan
> and face shield! : )
Bill here is what my woodworking has evolved down to.
I used to over think the possibilities and the what if's.
With experience I have learned to gravitated towards not over thinking
and simply building something. You will learn what has more importance
to you as you become more experienced and can adjust methods and
equipment accordingly. The important thing is to actually create
something and don't worry too much about the dust. Chances are if you
try to prevent sawdust you might spend way too much time doing so and
maybe not be needing to do so. Assess your needs after you make your
mess. ;!)
jo4hn <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:
> Lemmee help. Anybody out there have plans for a pointy stick?
> Woodworkers Orgasm Magazine says that the Binford 3K is the best blurfl
> around. Anybody have other opinions? Can we start a thread on the
> stupidest way to trash the president? Now I will disappear. Happy
> Holidaze all.
> mahalo,
> [anon]
I made a pointy stick a few weeks ago. It needed to be pointy on the
end, with the point facing the inside. I'm sure the procedure would be
different if the point needed to face the outside. As it was, I had to
turn the stick around and cut the inside on the outside but it worked
just fine.
A round pointy stick calls for a lathe, right? Well, that calls for a
chuck or careful turning between centers and I didn't have any of that.
I chucked a dowel into my trusty Makita and reached for my trusty block
plane. I use that block plane more than just about anything except the
tools I use more than. Spin the drill, hold the plane up to the drill
and in seconds I've got a pointy stick.
If you need one that points the other way, put the drill in reverse and
cut it from the other side.
Puckdropper
--
Make it to fit, don't make it fit.
Bill <[email protected]> wrote:
>Bill wrote:
>> The item in the link below seems needlessly complex, but is pretty
>> close to what I need. It is upside down in the picture, compared to
>> what I have in mind. I'm sure I could cobble something together
>> myself: Bend a piece of sheet steel into a U (with square corners),...
>
>As I was laying in bed this morning, it occurred to me again how closely
>this "chase" mimics "humans use of tools". Its right up there with
>Lew's "Thinking Chair". The activity must create a lot of endorphins
>(or something like that) because it seems to perpetuate itself.
>
>
>Bill
I'm thinking that after a couple more times of replying to your own
posts you will have this totally sorted out!
On Sun, 22 Dec 2013 19:11:18 -0500, Bill <[email protected]>
wrote:
>Bill wrote:
>> I never claimed to by a physicist or engineer, but I have found myself
>> trying to think like one in recent days.
>>
>> By borrowing from numerous sources and integrating a couple ideas of
>> my own, I drew up a blade guard design and assembly which suits my
>> present purposes.
>>
>> It relies however on a short vertical beam being supported ("hung") by
>> a short supported length of 2by4. The shot vertical beam may consist
>> of a short length of square steel tubing, a short length of 2by4
>> material, or similar.
>>
>> I would like to be able to MOVE the beam along the length of the 2by4
>> (for horizontal adjustment). My question is: Is there a familiar
>> hardware item that will help me with this? All it needs to do is wrap
>> ("hook") around the 2by4 and provide a means to attach what I want.
>> It seems "definitely related" to a joist hanger, but seems to be
>> something different. The joist hangers that I have seen do not have
>> "hooks to wrap around the top of the support" (probably because that
>> would not evenly distribute the "load" in general).
>>
>> BTW, I AM striving to be mindful of "torsional" forces.
>>
>> Bill
>
>It occurred to me that a regular joist hanger slung over the supported
>2by4, sort of fits my request--but would not be nearly strong enough
>(to have things hanging from, without screws, nails, etc.)
Just a question as it seems like your planning to mount your guard to
the ceiling, Since you went to great trouble to get the mobile base
under the saw, are you planning on moving the saw regularly? If so
you might be ahead to look at how Biesemeyer does there overhead
guard. If I read correct your copying their gurard but mounting it to
the ceiling. If you can weld it would be easy to fabricate one that
attaches to your table, other wise when you move the saw out of the
way you have an obstacle to walk into. If you don't plan on moving
the saw again then it wouldn't matter. I just checked the price on
the system now and I can understand why you don't want to just buy
one. Starting to realize what a good deal I got when I bought my used
unisaw.
Mike M
On 12/23/2013 1:20 PM, Bill wrote:
> Larry Kraus wrote:
>> I'm thinking that after a couple more times of replying to your own
>> posts you will have this totally sorted out!
>
>
> Hush! Don't give away my secrets!!! : )
Lemmee help. Anybody out there have plans for a pointy stick?
Woodworkers Orgasm Magazine says that the Binford 3K is the best blurfl
around. Anybody have other opinions? Can we start a thread on the
stupidest way to trash the president? Now I will disappear. Happy
Holidaze all.
mahalo,
[anon]
Larry Kraus wrote:
> Bill <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Bill wrote:
>>> The item in the link below seems needlessly complex, but is pretty
>>> close to what I need. It is upside down in the picture, compared to
>>> what I have in mind. I'm sure I could cobble something together
>>> myself: Bend a piece of sheet steel into a U (with square corners),...
>> As I was laying in bed this morning, it occurred to me again how closely
>> this "chase" mimics "humans use of tools". Its right up there with
>> Lew's "Thinking Chair". The activity must create a lot of endorphins
>> (or something like that) because it seems to perpetuate itself.
>>
>>
>> Bill
> I'm thinking that after a couple more times of replying to your own
> posts you will have this totally sorted out!
Larry, I don't always post just because I have questions. I am helping
to "Create Content"!
I think that most people who write (good) books are students in disguise.
Maybe I could publish this project in a woodworking magazine? : )
-Bill Schwartz?
P.S. Thanks for posting to the thread! : ) I really don't wish to
bore everyone to death, so I didn't sayanything about "hooks around
dimensional lumber" (like under a paint holder on a ladder) above.
jo4hn wrote:
> On 12/23/2013 1:20 PM, Bill wrote:
>> Larry Kraus wrote:
>>> I'm thinking that after a couple more times of replying to your own
>>> posts you will have this totally sorted out!
>>
>>
>> Hush! Don't give away my secrets!!! : )
> Lemmee help. Anybody out there have plans for a pointy stick?
> Woodworkers Orgasm Magazine says that the Binford 3K is the best
> blurfl around. Anybody have other opinions? Can we start a thread on
> the stupidest way to trash the president? Now I will disappear.
> Happy Holidaze all.
> mahalo,
> [anon]
Mr. Mahalo, Think of it as "Call and Response" (a beautiful musical
concept).
Bill
Mike M wrote:
> On Sun, 22 Dec 2013 19:11:18 -0500, Bill <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> Bill wrote:
>>> I never claimed to by a physicist or engineer, but I have found myself
>>> trying to think like one in recent days.
>>>
>>> By borrowing from numerous sources and integrating a couple ideas of
>>> my own, I drew up a blade guard design and assembly which suits my
>>> present purposes.
>>>
>>> It relies however on a short vertical beam being supported ("hung") by
>>> a short supported length of 2by4. The shot vertical beam may consist
>>> of a short length of square steel tubing, a short length of 2by4
>>> material, or similar.
>>>
>>> I would like to be able to MOVE the beam along the length of the 2by4
>>> (for horizontal adjustment). My question is: Is there a familiar
>>> hardware item that will help me with this? All it needs to do is wrap
>>> ("hook") around the 2by4 and provide a means to attach what I want.
>>> It seems "definitely related" to a joist hanger, but seems to be
>>> something different. The joist hangers that I have seen do not have
>>> "hooks to wrap around the top of the support" (probably because that
>>> would not evenly distribute the "load" in general).
>>>
>>> BTW, I AM striving to be mindful of "torsional" forces.
>>>
>>> Bill
>> It occurred to me that a regular joist hanger slung over the supported
>> 2by4, sort of fits my request--but would not be nearly strong enough
>> (to have things hanging from, without screws, nails, etc.)
> Just a question as it seems like your planning to mount your guard to
> the ceiling,
I am not planning to mount it to the ceiling now Mike, but perhaps
eventually. I am presently planning to attach it, via linkage, to a
2by4 supported between two A-Frames (no "rocket science" going on
there). I'll start with a four or five foot 2by4 and see how that
works. That will make it easy enough to move a few feet to the left or
right, as necessary. The TS does move easily on it's mobile base, but
the whole floor does not lie in a plane. I haven't had the TS long
enough to say exactly where it is going to stay. In fact, I'm still
eager to turn it on for the first time! Besides tuning (a side-table
fell out of alignment), I still need to install the appropriate type of
outlet (it was 4-degrees F. last week). At some point, I may bring-in
dust collection, or a jointer, and I would probably adjust the location
of the saw for that. Eventually, I can imagine attaching the guard to
the ceiling, and that would not be a huge issue. It appears that most of
the time will go into making the hood of the blade guard. I've observed
that I could buy one for $30--but not nearly as nice of one (see
below). I've learned a shop is, or would do well to be, a dynamic
animal--especially a small shop. My 20' by 24' space is looking smaller
all the time (especially due to the squatters!) I think DadiOH taught
me that expression, and it always makes me smile (sort of).
I borrowed (i.e. took) the idea for the blade guard itself from Jason
Beamer. Each of its 4 sides slide-up under *appropriate* directional
force. But his guard appears to be 23" long! Before I start cutting, I
will build a prototype (out of cardboard, etc), and see if I can shorten
it and still capture its desirable features. The design for the linkage
was basically a function of it's constraints. One of them is that the
top of the guard needs to be held firmly in place to offer the most
safety. Another is that it needs to be "easily tunable" (so that it
rests squarely on the table). I sort of enjoyed the 20 or 30 minutes it
took me to work those features out (in the design). What I really mean,
I guess, is that I enjoyed it after I was finished! : ) And surely, I
didn't think of everything. In earlier posts, I went into detail about
how I would like to adjust the location of the guard horizontally (by
sliding along the beam). As you know better than I do, sometimes the
blade needs to be pretty close to the fence.
> Since you went to great trouble to get the mobile base
> under the saw, are you planning on moving the saw regularly?
Most of the trouble was re-attaching the 4-inch sub-base to the bottom
of the cabinet. Although the saw tipped (almost over) in the process,
moving it (dropping it?) into the mobile base was very little trouble.
It is quite easy to manage the weight via the long rails, and by using
shims. We had the saw 7 1/2" off the ground (using two stacks of five
24" 2by8s). Some of those pieces are soon be transformed into push
sticks! : )
Cheers,
Bill
> If so
> you might be ahead to look at how Biesemeyer does there overhead
> guard. If I read correct your copying their gurard but mounting it to
> the ceiling. If you can weld it would be easy to fabricate one that
> attaches to your table, other wise when you move the saw out of the
> way you have an obstacle to walk into. If you don't plan on moving
> the saw again then it wouldn't matter. I just checked the price on
> the system now and I can understand why you don't want to just buy
> one. Starting to realize what a good deal I got when I bought my used
> unisaw.
>
> Mike M
On Thu, 19 Dec 2013 00:36:45 -0600, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet>
wrote:
>On 12/18/2013 5:38 PM, Bill wrote:
>> Leon wrote:
>>> On 12/18/2013 10:48 AM, Bill wrote:
>>>> Doug Miller wrote:
>>>>> Bill <[email protected]> wrote in
>>>>> news:[email protected]:
>>>>>
>>>>>> There is some inspiration to be gleaned from the one of this page of
>>>>>> Grizzly's catalog (bottom of page):
>>>>>> http://www.grizzly.com/catalog/2013/Main/13
>>>>> Dust hose attaches in the wrong place. To do any good at all, the dust
>>>>> hose needs to attach at
>>>>> the *front* of the blade guard, not the rear.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> That makes sense now. How could they have got that wrong (just
>>>> rhetorical question)?
>>>> Thanks Doug.
>>>>
>>>> Bill
>>>
>>> Well It may not be wrong, SawStop claims extreme efficiency with their
>>> guard and the hose is at the rear. It all depends on the turbulence
>>> and flow inside the guard.
>>>
>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IJEi_lWGeLs
>>
>> Someone posted in the comments section of that video, that the person in
>> the video is "standing on the wrong side of the fence". What do you think?
>>
>>
>
>Well he is out of the line of kick back if that happened. I say stand
>out of direct line and where you feel most comfortable with maintaining
>control. I am typically on the left side of the blade.
Not to belabor the point but I think this discussion is worth
having...
If you're on the left side of the blade, aren't you tending to pinch
the board into the blade when you're close to the end of a rip? On
the right side of the fence, you're tending to push the side of the
board that's against the fence rather than the side that's against the
blade.
"Leon" wrote:
> I strongly recommend, for a home made push device, one that hooks at
> the back of the work and also has a long section that rests on top
> of the work. You really want to also hold the work down in addition
> to pushing. If you need a picture I can provide one.
>
> The push sticks that simply push from the back scare the heck out of
> me.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Whack a 2x6x8ft construction timber into 8 equal (12") pieces, then
either bandsaw a 3/8"x1-1/2"x11" piece away from bottom leaving a 1"
long
hook or epoxy a 3/8"x1-1/2"x1" piece to the 2x6 to form a hook.
Repeat on top of 2x6 to make two push sticks from each 2x6.
Lew
Lew Hodgett wrote:
> Whack a 2x6x8ft construction timber into 8 equal (12") pieces, then
> either bandsaw a 3/8"x1-1/2"x11" piece away from bottom leaving a 1"
> long
> hook or epoxy a 3/8"x1-1/2"x1" piece to the 2x6 to form a hook.
>
> Repeat on top of 2x6 to make two push sticks from each 2x6.
----------------------------------------------------
"Bill" wrote:
> I see. If I understand correctly, then, you like 1 1/2" wide push
> sticks.
---------------------------------
Yes
---------------------------------
> Do you have some 3/4" wide ones too?
----------------------------------
Yes
-----------------------------------
> I only mention that because it seems to be the common size. A 1.5"
> wide one sounds a little safer. Of course, I realize that the work
> would direct the best choice.
----------------------------------
They are cheap and fast to make.
----------------------------------
> I'm sure boat builders need substantial tools!
-------------------------------------
Yes but not necessarily for wood working.
Once you get past a good contractor's saw with a good fence
along with a good stacked dado, a 6" jointer and a bench top
planer, you are pretty much done with the heavy iron.
Also a good router kit is a must.
After that, it's sanding time since there are no square cuts when
finishing a boat.
Lots of time with a 12" disk sander along with a hand held 3-7/8"
right angle sander/grinder equipped with 24 grit sanding disks.
Much more free hand work than when building kitchens or furniture.
Lew
On Thu, 28 Nov 2013 15:32:23 -0500, Bill <[email protected]>
wrote:
>Bill wrote:
>>
>> Towards that goal, I noticed that Menards has this miter saw stand on
>> sale tomorrow for $29.99:
>> http://www.menards.com/main/see-more/dat-two-day-sale/portamate-miter-saw-stand/p-2180574-c-13916.htm
>>
>>
>I did a little research and found this is the Portamate 3600, and I
>compared it to the Portamate 4000. If it were the latter, I might bite.
>My current miter saw configuration take up more space than it justifies
>when I'm not using it.
Space can be a problem. Since we moved to this house, that's not my
problem anymore. I need time to fill the 2000^ft unfinished[*]
basement. ;-)
[*] so unfinished that there was one outlet in the entire thing.
On Mon, 09 Dec 2013 22:35:14 -0600, -MIKE- <[email protected]>
wrote:
>On 12/9/13, 6:26 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>>> Thinking more about push-sticks and table saws-- What are the chances
>>> >that an errant pushstick will yank one's hand towards the blade? Hmmm...
>> Exceedingly small. The rotation of the blade is towards you, so if
>> the stick gets tangled in the blade, it's coming back at you. It
>> might put your eye out, but it's unlikely to suck your fingers in. You
>> don't reach behind the blade, do you?
>>
>
>It's not the stick kicking back that's the danger.
Not the stick, the board. It's not on the table and can twist and
catch - instant kickback.
>It's your hand moving into the blade once the thing you're pushing
>against in gone.
"We're gonna need a bigger stick!"
On Thu, 28 Nov 2013 11:34:40 -0500, Bill <[email protected]>
wrote:
>Lew Hodgett wrote:
>> Bill wrote:
>>
>>> I was looking at parts diagram for a 2002 Unisaw that I located that
>>> didn't have a blade guard or splitter. I was surprised.
>> -------------------------------------------------------
>> http://tinyurl.com/3uxteay
>>
>> Have used this device on a Unisaw and it not only functional, but easy
>> to use.
>>
>> Easy to install, easy to remove when you don't need it.
>
>Thank you, Lew! I just added it to my "wish list".
I have one. That's what I was referring to as a "knife", which it
really isn't. It's a great addition. However, I wasn't impressed by
the installation. It's kinda kludgy.
On 12/9/2013 1:55 PM, woodchucker wrote:
> On 12/9/2013 2:21 PM, Bill wrote:
>> Mike Marlow, I bought some Grade 5 (instead of Grade 8) bolts and nuts
>> today just so I wouldn't have to wait anymore for them.
>>
>> This message isn't indexed in precisely the write location, but we're
>> not all writing for posterity.
>>
>>
>> Thinking more about push-sticks and table saws-- What are the chances
>> that an errant pushstick will yank one's hand towards the blade? Hmmm...
>>
>> Maybe should build one of those that look like a plane?
>>
>> I have been reading the older book, Cabinet Making and Millwork, by John
>> Feirer. It seemed to get more interesting when he got to the subject of
>> table saws. Coincidentally, I'm sure, I'm on page 285--"Pushsticks"
>> (only 600 pages to go...lol).
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Bill
>
> Two best push sticks... the GRIPPER
> Home made type that is used for thin sock... some thin piece of ply or
> wood that has a hook on the back to push the piece through.
I was going to add the Grippers, for the store bought solution, but
realized that Bill might be over whelmed with the possibilities. :~)
On 12/9/2013 3:21 PM, Bill wrote:
> Leon wrote:
>> On 12/9/2013 1:21 PM, Bill wrote:
>>> Mike Marlow, I bought some Grade 5 (instead of Grade 8) bolts and nuts
>>> today just so I wouldn't have to wait anymore for them.
>>>
>>> This message isn't indexed in precisely the write location, but we're
>>> not all writing for posterity.
>>>
>>>
>>> Thinking more about push-sticks and table saws-- What are the chances
>>> that an errant pushstick will yank one's hand towards the blade? Hmmm...
>>>
>>> Maybe should build one of those that look like a plane?
>>>
>>> I have been reading the older book, Cabinet Making and Millwork, by John
>>> Feirer. It seemed to get more interesting when he got to the subject of
>>> table saws. Coincidentally, I'm sure, I'm on page 285--"Pushsticks"
>>> (only 600 pages to go...lol).
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Bill
>>
>>
>> I strongly recommend, for a home made push device, one that hooks at
>> the back of the work and also has a long section that rests on top of
>> the work. You really want to also hold the work down in addition to
>> pushing. If you need a picture I can provide one.
>>
>> The push sticks that simply push from the back scare the heck out of me.
> I think the 4 or 5 in Feier's book fit that description, as well as the
> sketch of one provided in the TS Owners Manual.
>
> I am familar with the shape of the one you are proposing. Since the
> Biesemeyer (78-961) splitter I'll be using will prevent me from using
> the blade guard,
> the push stick I use merits a little more consideration. I can surely
> google a template. Thanks for setting me straight on that!
>
> Bill
>
The beis splitter probably prevents you from using the gripper.
it sticks too high up to allow it to pass through.
That's why I like my splitter or a riving knife.
--
Jeff
On 12/18/2013 7:01 PM, Doug Miller wrote:
> Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet> wrote in news:
> [email protected]:
>
>>
>> Well It may not be wrong, SawStop claims extreme efficiency with their
>> guard and the hose is at the rear. It all depends on the turbulence and
>> flow inside the guard.
>
> SawStop also has the dust hose connected to a shroud that surrounds the blade, instead of to
> a port that's basically just a 4"-diameter hole in the cabinet. I imagine that catches most of the
> sawdust.
>
Actually it collects from a 4" port in the cabinet and the smaller one
at the back of the guard. The smaller one "T's" off from the 4" port at
the back of the saw.
On 12/18/2013 5:38 PM, Bill wrote:
> Leon wrote:
>> On 12/18/2013 10:48 AM, Bill wrote:
>>> Doug Miller wrote:
>>>> Bill <[email protected]> wrote in
>>>> news:[email protected]:
>>>>
>>>>> There is some inspiration to be gleaned from the one of this page of
>>>>> Grizzly's catalog (bottom of page):
>>>>> http://www.grizzly.com/catalog/2013/Main/13
>>>> Dust hose attaches in the wrong place. To do any good at all, the dust
>>>> hose needs to attach at
>>>> the *front* of the blade guard, not the rear.
>>>>
>>>
>>> That makes sense now. How could they have got that wrong (just
>>> rhetorical question)?
>>> Thanks Doug.
>>>
>>> Bill
>>
>> Well It may not be wrong, SawStop claims extreme efficiency with their
>> guard and the hose is at the rear. It all depends on the turbulence
>> and flow inside the guard.
>>
>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IJEi_lWGeLs
>
> Someone posted in the comments section of that video, that the person in
> the video is "standing on the wrong side of the fence". What do you think?
>
>
Well he is out of the line of kick back if that happened. I say stand
out of direct line and where you feel most comfortable with maintaining
control. I am typically on the left side of the blade.
On 11/25/2013 9:05 PM, Bill wrote:
> Based on the date (2002), I think it's Model 36-841.
Yep, that shows a different splitter than mine. Mine is a one knob
affair that goes off and on in less than ten seconds.
Since I don't use the blade guard, but I do use the splitter, I cut the
kickback pawls off the splitter and made it short enough that I can
leave it on for sled crosscuts, which is about 95% of crosscutting I do
in the shop.
https://picasaweb.google.com/111355467778981859077/EWoodShopJustStuff#5850516674541872338
And it still provides ample kickback protection for rip cuts.
--
eWoodShop: www.eWoodShop.com
Wood Shop: www.e-WoodShop.net
google.com/+KarlCaillouet
http://www.custommade.com/by/ewoodshop/
KarlCaillouet@ (the obvious)
On 12/9/2013 1:21 PM, Bill wrote:
> Mike Marlow, I bought some Grade 5 (instead of Grade 8) bolts and nuts
> today just so I wouldn't have to wait anymore for them.
>
> This message isn't indexed in precisely the write location, but we're
> not all writing for posterity.
>
>
> Thinking more about push-sticks and table saws-- What are the chances
> that an errant pushstick will yank one's hand towards the blade? Hmmm...
>
> Maybe should build one of those that look like a plane?
>
> I have been reading the older book, Cabinet Making and Millwork, by John
> Feirer. It seemed to get more interesting when he got to the subject of
> table saws. Coincidentally, I'm sure, I'm on page 285--"Pushsticks"
> (only 600 pages to go...lol).
>
> Cheers,
> Bill
I strongly recommend, for a home made push device, one that hooks at the
back of the work and also has a long section that rests on top of the
work. You really want to also hold the work down in addition to
pushing. If you need a picture I can provide one.
The push sticks that simply push from the back scare the heck out of me.
On 12/16/2013 11:14 PM, Bill wrote:
> Bill wrote:
>> I was looking at parts diagram for a 2002 Unisaw that I located that
>> didn't have a blade guard or splitter.
> The saw made the 5 mile ride home without incident, but, to be honest,
> it practically fell over twice (never ALL the way over--but beyond
> 45-degrees) by the time it was in it's mobile base yesterday! : ) Both
> of those were "pretty interesting" moments. In the first one I was alone.
>
> Now I'm looking at *blade guards*.
>
> While exploring some of my options, I noticed that ShopNotes featured an
> article on building a "Dust-Free Blade Guard"
> in 1997 (Volume 16, Issue 92). It seems to be a pretty popular on the
> Internet. Is it possible someone has a version of the article that they
> might post to abpw?
> I am a subscriber to the magazine but I don't save most copies.
>
> Thanks,
> Bill
I can help you out on that Bill, I will not post it but would be happy
to pdf you a copy directly to you.
BTY it is a two part article, one for the guard nd a short one for the
guard support.
If you are interested send me an e-mail.
On 11/28/2013 12:47 PM, Sonny wrote:
> On Thursday, November 28, 2013 11:02:29 AM UTC-6, Bill wrote:
>> Can I apply lithium grease on the internal parts corresponding to the height/tilt wheels of the saw, or is there something more suitable for this purpose?
>
> Applying a lubricant to the large gears or teeth of the gears? There seems to be some difference of opinions about lubrcating those teeth/gears, similar to lubricating the threads on a wood vise screw.
>
> Some oils or grease tend to collect sawdust, adding to any potential problem for smooth operation. Clean, substance free gears/teeth or threads seems to work just fine, for me, though my saw's angle gear squeaks like hell, when cranking it. I suspect it's the shaft/support that squeaks, not the teeth/gears.
>
> I don't lubricate my gears and sawdust collects on them, anyway, but it's not "stuck" on. It's a lot easier blowing the dust off, with the air hose, if the dust is not stuck on by a lubricant. In my case, sawdust collecting on the gears/teeth is much more pronounced on the saw that is not attached to the DC.
>
> I would suggest you not lubricate the gears. If your experience suggests otherwise, then try lubricating and compare the results.
>
> Sonny
>
Lube the gears but don't use grease. I use TopCote. I suspect any one
of these would work well.
http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00D3IDV8E/ref=asc_df_B00D3IDV8E2852865?smid=A19VW1BL9ZXZVA&tag=dealtmp336018-20&linkCode=asn&creative=395105&creativeASIN=B00D3IDV8E
On 11/28/2013 2:28 PM, Bill wrote:
> Sonny wrote:
>> On Thursday, November 28, 2013 11:02:29 AM UTC-6, Bill wrote:
>>> Can I apply lithium grease on the internal parts corresponding to the
>>> height/tilt wheels of the saw, or is there something more suitable
>>> for this purpose?
>> Applying a lubricant to the large gears or teeth of the gears? There
>> seems to be some difference of opinions about lubrcating those
>> teeth/gears, similar to lubricating the threads on a wood vise screw.
>>
>> Some oils or grease tend to collect sawdust, adding to any potential
>> problem for smooth operation. Clean, substance free gears/teeth or
>> threads seems to work just fine, for me, though my saw's angle gear
>> squeaks like hell, when cranking it. I suspect it's the shaft/support
>> that squeaks, not the teeth/gears.
>
> There is some squeaks. No functional problem that I am aware of. The
> idea of putting grease onto the gears raised my caution flag too. I
> suspect that the saw just hasn't been used in a while.
There really is no problem with using a grease, the factory uses grease.
But there is more maintenance involved with having to clean more often.
On 12/9/2013 2:21 PM, Bill wrote:
>
> I am familar with the shape of the one you are proposing.
https://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/QLB8tHZd3FQ3SXSzac07C9MTjNZETYmyPJy0liipFm0?feat=directlink
--
eWoodShop: www.eWoodShop.com
Wood Shop: www.e-WoodShop.net
google.com/+KarlCaillouet
http://www.custommade.com/by/ewoodshop/
KarlCaillouet@ (the obvious)
On 11/28/2013 11:02 AM, Bill wrote:
> Sonny wrote:
>> On Wednesday, November 27, 2013 9:47:25 PM UTC-6, Bill wrote:
>>> I should read the manual too, because I learned some things while I
>>> was scanning it. In particular that the blades should be locked
>>> before the saw is turned on.
>> And don't torque the lock knobs (height and angle) really tight. Firm
>> tightening, but not super tight. You'll learn and get the feel for
>> sufficient tightening. With my older '81 saw, the "tightening" of
>> the heigth knob has worn, a bit, probably from over tightening.
>>
>> Three finger firm tightening, if this defines my experience, reasonably.
>
> Yes, I'm getting the hint with "set screws". Next time my bathroom sink
> faucet starts to leak, I'll probably be buying new faucets instead of a
> $1 rubber part. And that's at least the 2nd time, I've stripped a set
> screw in recent history. I even bought a torque-wrench to help me curb
> my neanderthalic-tendencies. And, in the one time I've used it so far
> (for a lawn-mower spark plug), it may already have paid for itself.
>
> Can I apply lithium grease on the internal parts corresponding to the
> height/tilt wheels of the saw, or is there something more suitable for
> this purpose?
>
> Bill
The lock tends to be a bear to loosen when you tighten it too much. You
will not make that mistake too often. ;~)
When in doubt tighten with your less dominant hand, it only needs to be
snug. I'm not really sure you could over tighten it with out a pipe
wrench, so you are not likely to break anything if every thing is
working correctly.
IIRC the lock action is simply a cone shaped pointed end on the lock
knob shaft that presses into a cone shaped funnel on the receiving end.
Not like a nut and bolt. If you screw the lock knob out you will see
what is going on.
On 12/17/2013 6:17 PM, woodchucker wrote:
> On 12/17/2013 5:47 PM, Sonny wrote:
>> On Tuesday, December 17, 2013 4:27:16 PM UTC-6, Bill wrote:
>>> Sonny, Thank you for the download! >> >
>>
>> YW. Having to download 8 issues of ShopNotes, for just a few pages,
>> seems impractical. Then, some of the left edge of the pages
>> (discussion), on that download, were blurred.
>>
>> Maybe Jeff can find something better, if Leon doesn't beat him to it.
>>
>> If you wait a bit, after I win the MegaMillions pot,
> :-)
>
> I'll buy you a blade guard of your choice, tomorrow.
>>
>> Sonny
>>
>
>
Bill, while not much better than what Sonny had, I like the hood better.
Not the arm.. I think if you marry Sonny's and this together you would
likely come out with a nice unit.
You might even marry some pvc into the support arm (along with the pipe
for some dust extraction).
See the alt binaries.
--
Jeff
On 12/19/2013 5:55 PM, [email protected] wrote:
> On Thu, 19 Dec 2013 16:26:20 -0600, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet>
> wrote:
>
>> On 12/19/2013 4:22 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>>> On Thu, 19 Dec 2013 15:29:19 -0500, "Mike Marlow"
>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> [email protected] wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> If you're on the left side of the blade, aren't you tending to pinch
>>>>> the board into the blade when you're close to the end of a rip?
>>>>
>>>> No.
>>>>
>>>> >On
>>>>> the right side of the fence, you're tending to push the side of the
>>>>> board that's against the fence rather than the side that's against the
>>>>> blade.
>>>>
>>>> I beg to differ. You "tend" to do no such thing. You might do such as a
>>>> matter of practice, but that is very different from you "tend" to do. I do
>>>> not think there is any such tendency to push left or right no matter which
>>>> side you stand on. I know that I am always pushing into the fence.
>>>
>>> You're pushing the same direction; against the fence. The difference
>>> is that the left side of the board is pinching the blade, too.
>>>
>>
>>
>> Actually the left side of the wood only pinches the blade if your fence
>> is not parallel to the blade, skewed away from the blade on the back
>> side of the blade. Or if you are incorrectly pushing the wood from the
>> left side after it has passed the front of the blade.
>
> Huh? The fence on that SS is on the right side of the blade, no? The
> issue isn't the alignment at all.
>
> The issue I'm talking about is when you get to the end of the board,
> which side of the blade are your finners (push stick) on?
Right side of the blade.
I say it
> should be on the right side of the blade so the board is being held
> against the blade, rather then the left side so you're holding the
> board against the blade.
Yes, correct but I can do that by standing on the left side of the blade.
>
On Thu, 19 Dec 2013 17:30:34 -0500, "Mike Marlow"
<[email protected]> wrote:
>[email protected] wrote:
>> On Thu, 19 Dec 2013 15:29:19 -0500, "Mike Marlow"
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> [email protected] wrote:
>>>
>>>> If you're on the left side of the blade, aren't you tending to pinch
>>>> the board into the blade when you're close to the end of a rip?
>>>
>>> No.
>>>
>>> >On
>>>> the right side of the fence, you're tending to push the side of the
>>>> board that's against the fence rather than the side that's against
>>>> the blade.
>>>
>>> I beg to differ. You "tend" to do no such thing. You might do such
>>> as a matter of practice, but that is very different from you "tend"
>>> to do. I do not think there is any such tendency to push left or
>>> right no matter which side you stand on. I know that I am always
>>> pushing into the fence.
>>
>> You're pushing the same direction; against the fence. The difference
>> is that the left side of the board is pinching the blade, too.
>
>No - it's really not. The kerf prevents that very action. Remember - I'm
>not pushing against the fence ahead of the blade. I'm curious how you feel
>that pushing against the fence could cause any problems - that's exactly
>what you want to do.
But you're on the wrong side of the board to push the board against
the fence.
On Thu, 19 Dec 2013 16:26:20 -0600, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet>
wrote:
>On 12/19/2013 4:22 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>> On Thu, 19 Dec 2013 15:29:19 -0500, "Mike Marlow"
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> [email protected] wrote:
>>>
>>>> If you're on the left side of the blade, aren't you tending to pinch
>>>> the board into the blade when you're close to the end of a rip?
>>>
>>> No.
>>>
>>> >On
>>>> the right side of the fence, you're tending to push the side of the
>>>> board that's against the fence rather than the side that's against the
>>>> blade.
>>>
>>> I beg to differ. You "tend" to do no such thing. You might do such as a
>>> matter of practice, but that is very different from you "tend" to do. I do
>>> not think there is any such tendency to push left or right no matter which
>>> side you stand on. I know that I am always pushing into the fence.
>>
>> You're pushing the same direction; against the fence. The difference
>> is that the left side of the board is pinching the blade, too.
>>
>
>
>Actually the left side of the wood only pinches the blade if your fence
>is not parallel to the blade, skewed away from the blade on the back
>side of the blade. Or if you are incorrectly pushing the wood from the
>left side after it has passed the front of the blade.
Huh? The fence on that SS is on the right side of the blade, no? The
issue isn't the alignment at all.
The issue I'm talking about is when you get to the end of the board,
which side of the blade are your finners (push stick) on? I say it
should be on the right side of the blade so the board is being held
against the blade, rather then the left side so you're holding the
board against the blade.
On Thu, 19 Dec 2013 15:34:07 -0500, "Mike Marlow"
<[email protected]> wrote:
>Bill wrote:
>> Sonny wrote:
>>> Belaboring dust collection: My suggestion to Bill would be to not
>>> bother with dust collection above the table top, but do get a blade
>>> guard. If you were doing production work, there would be a good
>>> reason to have the dust collected above the blade. For hobby work,
>>> invest in a dust brush, broom & dust pan.... and wear goggles or a
>>> face shield, if the dust flies in your face. Your saw is mobile, so
>>> I'd suppose you may be using the saw near the garage door, or at
>>> least out in the open, convenient to clean up scattered dust from
>>> the top. If need be, add a dust port to the guard, later. For the
>>> time being, get the saw in safe working order and start doing some
>>> woodwork. Spend the proposed dust collection money on lumber, for
>>> now. Screw that dust port. Let's cut some boards.
>>>
>>> Sonny
>>
>> Yes, I agree with your spirit. The morning I am thinking of a
>> structure based on a "quilt rack" model--upside down "T" ends, as
>> legs, with a mast of of 3/4" steel square tubing.
>> To that I can attach a Loxan polycarbonate box (blade cover), with
>> hinged front, sides and back--like the box in this video:
>>
>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cxZOO_zcpNM
>>
>> As you suggest, I can always improve upon it.
>>
>
>Get cutting with that saw Bill! If you keep this up you'll be longer
>cutting a board on it than you were wiring your garage lights. Go ahead -
>stick a piece of wood in that thing... you'll love the feel of it.
I think his bigger problem right now is temperature. Hey, Bill, don't
put your tongue on the table! ...and don't shoot your eye out. ;-)
On 12/17/2013 5:47 PM, Sonny wrote:
> On Tuesday, December 17, 2013 4:27:16 PM UTC-6, Bill wrote:
>> Sonny, Thank you for the download! >> >
>
> YW. Having to download 8 issues of ShopNotes, for just a few pages, seems impractical. Then, some of the left edge of the pages (discussion), on that download, were blurred.
>
> Maybe Jeff can find something better, if Leon doesn't beat him to it.
>
> If you wait a bit, after I win the MegaMillions pot,
:-)
I'll buy you a blade guard of your choice, tomorrow.
>
> Sonny
>
--
Jeff
On Thu, 19 Dec 2013 15:29:19 -0500, "Mike Marlow"
<[email protected]> wrote:
>[email protected] wrote:
>
>> If you're on the left side of the blade, aren't you tending to pinch
>> the board into the blade when you're close to the end of a rip?
>
>No.
>
> >On
>> the right side of the fence, you're tending to push the side of the
>> board that's against the fence rather than the side that's against the
>> blade.
>
>I beg to differ. You "tend" to do no such thing. You might do such as a
>matter of practice, but that is very different from you "tend" to do. I do
>not think there is any such tendency to push left or right no matter which
>side you stand on. I know that I am always pushing into the fence.
You're pushing the same direction; against the fence. The difference
is that the left side of the board is pinching the blade, too.
On 12/19/2013 4:22 PM, [email protected] wrote:
> On Thu, 19 Dec 2013 15:29:19 -0500, "Mike Marlow"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> [email protected] wrote:
>>
>>> If you're on the left side of the blade, aren't you tending to pinch
>>> the board into the blade when you're close to the end of a rip?
>>
>> No.
>>
>> >On
>>> the right side of the fence, you're tending to push the side of the
>>> board that's against the fence rather than the side that's against the
>>> blade.
>>
>> I beg to differ. You "tend" to do no such thing. You might do such as a
>> matter of practice, but that is very different from you "tend" to do. I do
>> not think there is any such tendency to push left or right no matter which
>> side you stand on. I know that I am always pushing into the fence.
>
> You're pushing the same direction; against the fence. The difference
> is that the left side of the board is pinching the blade, too.
>
Actually the left side of the wood only pinches the blade if your fence
is not parallel to the blade, skewed away from the blade on the back
side of the blade. Or if you are incorrectly pushing the wood from the
left side after it has passed the front of the blade.
On 12/19/2013 5:58 PM, [email protected] wrote:
> On Thu, 19 Dec 2013 16:15:01 -0600, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet>
> wrote:
>
>> On 12/19/2013 11:03 AM, [email protected] wrote:
>>> On Thu, 19 Dec 2013 00:36:45 -0600, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 12/18/2013 5:38 PM, Bill wrote:
>>>>> Leon wrote:
>>>>>> On 12/18/2013 10:48 AM, Bill wrote:
>>>>>>> Doug Miller wrote:
>>>>>>>> Bill <[email protected]> wrote in
>>>>>>>> news:[email protected]:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> There is some inspiration to be gleaned from the one of this page of
>>>>>>>>> Grizzly's catalog (bottom of page):
>>>>>>>>> http://www.grizzly.com/catalog/2013/Main/13
>>>>>>>> Dust hose attaches in the wrong place. To do any good at all, the dust
>>>>>>>> hose needs to attach at
>>>>>>>> the *front* of the blade guard, not the rear.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> That makes sense now. How could they have got that wrong (just
>>>>>>> rhetorical question)?
>>>>>>> Thanks Doug.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Bill
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Well It may not be wrong, SawStop claims extreme efficiency with their
>>>>>> guard and the hose is at the rear. It all depends on the turbulence
>>>>>> and flow inside the guard.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IJEi_lWGeLs
>>>>>
>>>>> Someone posted in the comments section of that video, that the person in
>>>>> the video is "standing on the wrong side of the fence". What do you think?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Well he is out of the line of kick back if that happened. I say stand
>>>> out of direct line and where you feel most comfortable with maintaining
>>>> control. I am typically on the left side of the blade.
>>>
>>> Not to belabor the point but I think this discussion is worth
>>> having...
>>>
>>> If you're on the left side of the blade, aren't you tending to pinch
>>> the board into the blade when you're close to the end of a rip? On
>>> the right side of the fence, you're tending to push the side of the
>>> board that's against the fence rather than the side that's against the
>>> blade.
>>>
>>>
>> Not sure I understand pinch the board into the blade.
>
> You're on the left side of the board, so the left side of the blade.
> You're holding onto the left side, so when the board gets to the end,
> you're pushing the kerf closed.
I don't push on the side of the board once it has reached the blade,
that would actually pinch the blade if the wast was narrow.
By the same token you should not use a feather board past the front of
the board.
On 12/19/2013 6:37 PM, Leon wrote:
> On 12/19/2013 5:58 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>> On Thu, 19 Dec 2013 16:15:01 -0600, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 12/19/2013 11:03 AM, [email protected] wrote:
>>>> On Thu, 19 Dec 2013 00:36:45 -0600, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 12/18/2013 5:38 PM, Bill wrote:
>>>>>> Leon wrote:
>>>>>>> On 12/18/2013 10:48 AM, Bill wrote:
>>>>>>>> Doug Miller wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Bill <[email protected]> wrote in
>>>>>>>>> news:[email protected]:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> There is some inspiration to be gleaned from the one of this
>>>>>>>>>> page of
>>>>>>>>>> Grizzly's catalog (bottom of page):
>>>>>>>>>> http://www.grizzly.com/catalog/2013/Main/13
>>>>>>>>> Dust hose attaches in the wrong place. To do any good at all,
>>>>>>>>> the dust
>>>>>>>>> hose needs to attach at
>>>>>>>>> the *front* of the blade guard, not the rear.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> That makes sense now. How could they have got that wrong (just
>>>>>>>> rhetorical question)?
>>>>>>>> Thanks Doug.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Bill
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Well It may not be wrong, SawStop claims extreme efficiency with
>>>>>>> their
>>>>>>> guard and the hose is at the rear. It all depends on the turbulence
>>>>>>> and flow inside the guard.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IJEi_lWGeLs
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Someone posted in the comments section of that video, that the
>>>>>> person in
>>>>>> the video is "standing on the wrong side of the fence". What do
>>>>>> you think?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Well he is out of the line of kick back if that happened. I say stand
>>>>> out of direct line and where you feel most comfortable with
>>>>> maintaining
>>>>> control. I am typically on the left side of the blade.
>>>>
>>>> Not to belabor the point but I think this discussion is worth
>>>> having...
>>>>
>>>> If you're on the left side of the blade, aren't you tending to pinch
>>>> the board into the blade when you're close to the end of a rip? On
>>>> the right side of the fence, you're tending to push the side of the
>>>> board that's against the fence rather than the side that's against the
>>>> blade.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Not sure I understand pinch the board into the blade.
>>
>> You're on the left side of the board, so the left side of the blade.
>> You're holding onto the left side, so when the board gets to the end,
>> you're pushing the kerf closed.
>
> I don't push on the side of the board once it has reached the blade,
> that would actually pinch the blade if the wast was narrow.
>
> By the same token you should not use a feather board past the front of
> the board.
>
>
>
Past the front of the blade, that is.
On Thu, 19 Dec 2013 16:15:01 -0600, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet>
wrote:
>On 12/19/2013 11:03 AM, [email protected] wrote:
>> On Thu, 19 Dec 2013 00:36:45 -0600, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 12/18/2013 5:38 PM, Bill wrote:
>>>> Leon wrote:
>>>>> On 12/18/2013 10:48 AM, Bill wrote:
>>>>>> Doug Miller wrote:
>>>>>>> Bill <[email protected]> wrote in
>>>>>>> news:[email protected]:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> There is some inspiration to be gleaned from the one of this page of
>>>>>>>> Grizzly's catalog (bottom of page):
>>>>>>>> http://www.grizzly.com/catalog/2013/Main/13
>>>>>>> Dust hose attaches in the wrong place. To do any good at all, the dust
>>>>>>> hose needs to attach at
>>>>>>> the *front* of the blade guard, not the rear.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That makes sense now. How could they have got that wrong (just
>>>>>> rhetorical question)?
>>>>>> Thanks Doug.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Bill
>>>>>
>>>>> Well It may not be wrong, SawStop claims extreme efficiency with their
>>>>> guard and the hose is at the rear. It all depends on the turbulence
>>>>> and flow inside the guard.
>>>>>
>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IJEi_lWGeLs
>>>>
>>>> Someone posted in the comments section of that video, that the person in
>>>> the video is "standing on the wrong side of the fence". What do you think?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Well he is out of the line of kick back if that happened. I say stand
>>> out of direct line and where you feel most comfortable with maintaining
>>> control. I am typically on the left side of the blade.
>>
>> Not to belabor the point but I think this discussion is worth
>> having...
>>
>> If you're on the left side of the blade, aren't you tending to pinch
>> the board into the blade when you're close to the end of a rip? On
>> the right side of the fence, you're tending to push the side of the
>> board that's against the fence rather than the side that's against the
>> blade.
>>
>>
>Not sure I understand pinch the board into the blade.
You're on the left side of the board, so the left side of the blade.
You're holding onto the left side, so when the board gets to the end,
you're pushing the kerf closed.
>But I feed with my right hand and hold the work down with the left. My
>right hand is grabbing the right side of the board and pushing until the
>end is on the table top, then I push directly from the rear. The left
>hand keeps the work pushed down and against the fence.
>I may or may not use a push device depending on the width of the rip.
>
[email protected] wrote:
> On Thu, 19 Dec 2013 15:29:19 -0500, "Mike Marlow"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> [email protected] wrote:
>>
>>> If you're on the left side of the blade, aren't you tending to pinch
>>> the board into the blade when you're close to the end of a rip?
>>
>> No.
>>
>> >On
>>> the right side of the fence, you're tending to push the side of the
>>> board that's against the fence rather than the side that's against
>>> the blade.
>>
>> I beg to differ. You "tend" to do no such thing. You might do such
>> as a matter of practice, but that is very different from you "tend"
>> to do. I do not think there is any such tendency to push left or
>> right no matter which side you stand on. I know that I am always
>> pushing into the fence.
>
> You're pushing the same direction; against the fence. The difference
> is that the left side of the board is pinching the blade, too.
No - it's really not. The kerf prevents that very action. Remember - I'm
not pushing against the fence ahead of the blade. I'm curious how you feel
that pushing against the fence could cause any problems - that's exactly
what you want to do.
--
-Mike-
[email protected]
On 11/26/2013 11:43 AM, Mike Marlow wrote:
> Swingman wrote:
>
>>> Since I don't use the blade guard, but I do use the splitter, I cut
>>> the kickback pawls off the splitter and made it short enough that I
>>> can leave it on for sled crosscuts, which is about 95% of
>>> crosscutting I do in the shop.
>>
>> No redirect
>>
>> https://picasaweb.google.com/111355467778981859077/EWoodShopJustStuff?noredirect=1#5850516674541872338
>
> Karl - how deep is your sled (front to back)? I'm thinking of a sled as I
> get older and wiser and have been mulling over just how deep to build one.
I have a few of various sizes. The one in the photo I use the most and
will cut a 13" wide panel, so it is about 13 1/4" deep.
I chose that dimension specifically because it is comfortable to use,
not unwieldy, works well with the width of the front edge of the table
saw table to the blade, can be stored under the front rail of table saw,
and allows me to cut, among less wide parts, wall cabinet end panels,
which are generally a standard 11 1/2" (FF) to 12" (Frameless) wide.
I do have much bigger ones, for larger panel crosscuts, miter cuts, and
dado cuts, but that one is used almost exclusively for all shop
crosscuts that will fit in it.
--
eWoodShop: www.eWoodShop.com
Wood Shop: www.e-WoodShop.net
google.com/+KarlCaillouet
http://www.custommade.com/by/ewoodshop/
KarlCaillouet@ (the obvious)
On 11/27/2013 7:48 PM, Bill wrote:
> [email protected] wrote:
>> You'll use the inserts. You'll probably want to buy more, if you do a
>> lot of dado cuts. Did I mention that Forrest makes a nice dado set?
>> ;-)
> I already bought a Freud dado set, with Rockler's 20% off coupon a few
> months ago--anticipating that I would one day own a saw. What I need is
> a suitable 230W adapter/plug-inlet for the wall. The one I already
> purchased doesn't fit the horizontally-slotted plug. That's the sort of
> problem you may run into with anticipatory purchases...
>
>>
>> I really like my JessEm miter gauge (JessEm makes great stuff). The
>> Incra 1000HD is really nice, too, though not as solid.
> Amazon had the Incra 1000HD on sale for about $110 during last Christmas
> season. I'll let you know if I see it.
> If you doubt me, check camelcamelcamel.com (I haven't checked, I may be
> off by a few dollars).
>
> Bill
>>
>
FWIW I bought the Incra 1000HD about 18 months ago and love it. It is
so rock solid an accurate that for quite a while I atually quit using my
Dubby Miter Sleds. The Dubbys are great up to about 25" but for 1x8
material the Incra works well.
One other note I also bought the next size up telescoping fence. The
measured capacity is now 49"
And add the a sacrificial fence for tear out free cross cuts.
On 12/18/2013 5:38 PM, Bill wrote:
> Someone posted in the comments section of that video, that the person in
> the video is "standing on the wrong side of the fence". What do you think?
Here, I'll say it again:
"Awareness of and an unflagging practice of "Safety" in the shop is
unarguably the single most valuable component of a lasting enjoyment of
same. However, too often in the current world of print and bits and
bytes, playing the "safety" card has become a mixture of the tone of
political correctness, a whiff of Wikipedia wisdom, and a nagging fear
of being held accountable, presented in toto with a smug assertiveness
that presupposes the purveyor's superior ken, but, in actuality is
little more than ignorance of underlying issues swept under the shop mat."
As Doug and krw indicated, the commentard fits the above to a "T".
--
eWoodShop: www.eWoodShop.com
Wood Shop: www.e-WoodShop.net
google.com/+KarlCaillouet
http://www.custommade.com/by/ewoodshop/
KarlCaillouet@ (the obvious)
Bill <[email protected]> wrote in news:[email protected]:
> There is some inspiration to be gleaned from the one of this page of
> Grizzly's catalog (bottom of page):
> http://www.grizzly.com/catalog/2013/Main/13
Dust hose attaches in the wrong place. To do any good at all, the dust hose needs to attach at
the *front* of the blade guard, not the rear.
On Thu, 19 Dec 2013 18:40:59 -0600, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet>
wrote:
>On 12/19/2013 5:55 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>> On Thu, 19 Dec 2013 16:26:20 -0600, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 12/19/2013 4:22 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>>>> On Thu, 19 Dec 2013 15:29:19 -0500, "Mike Marlow"
>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> [email protected] wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> If you're on the left side of the blade, aren't you tending to pinch
>>>>>> the board into the blade when you're close to the end of a rip?
>>>>>
>>>>> No.
>>>>>
>>>>> >On
>>>>>> the right side of the fence, you're tending to push the side of the
>>>>>> board that's against the fence rather than the side that's against the
>>>>>> blade.
>>>>>
>>>>> I beg to differ. You "tend" to do no such thing. You might do such as a
>>>>> matter of practice, but that is very different from you "tend" to do. I do
>>>>> not think there is any such tendency to push left or right no matter which
>>>>> side you stand on. I know that I am always pushing into the fence.
>>>>
>>>> You're pushing the same direction; against the fence. The difference
>>>> is that the left side of the board is pinching the blade, too.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Actually the left side of the wood only pinches the blade if your fence
>>> is not parallel to the blade, skewed away from the blade on the back
>>> side of the blade. Or if you are incorrectly pushing the wood from the
>>> left side after it has passed the front of the blade.
>>
>> Huh? The fence on that SS is on the right side of the blade, no? The
>> issue isn't the alignment at all.
>>
>> The issue I'm talking about is when you get to the end of the board,
>> which side of the blade are your finners (push stick) on?
>
>Right side of the blade.
>
...and you're standing on the left? What about a 2' wide panel?
>
> I say it
>> should be on the right side of the blade so the board is being held
>> against the blade, rather then the left side so you're holding the
>> board against the blade.
>
>Yes, correct but I can do that by standing on the left side of the blade.
I'm not seeing it with any width of a board.
Bill <[email protected]> wrote in news:[email protected]:
> Woodchucker wrote:
>
> > I think if you marry Sonny's and this together you would likely come
> out with a nice unit.
> > You might even marry some pvc into the support arm (along with the
> pipe for some dust extraction).
>
> Jeff, I think your idea of using PVC for a dust collecting support arm
> has a lot of merit.
Some merit, anyway. I tried that about a year ago; even 2" PVC is disappointingly flexible
over a span of 4+ feet, and requires overhead support.
:-(
> One could pick up a few ideas from the support arm of this unit:
>
> http://www.pennstateind.com/library/TSGUARD_ins.pdf
That's what I modeled mine after (except I put the dust port in front where it belongs). I used
PVC mostly for proof-of-concept, and will probably re-do it some day using EMT or RMC.
Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet> wrote in news:
[email protected]:
>
> Well It may not be wrong, SawStop claims extreme efficiency with their
> guard and the hose is at the rear. It all depends on the turbulence and
> flow inside the guard.
SawStop also has the dust hose connected to a shroud that surrounds the blade, instead of to
a port that's basically just a 4"-diameter hole in the cabinet. I imagine that catches most of the
sawdust.
Bill <[email protected]> wrote in news:[email protected]:
> Leon wrote:
>>
>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IJEi_lWGeLs
>
> Someone posted in the comments section of that video, that the person in
> the video is "standing on the wrong side of the fence". What do you think?
I think he's full of baloney; I disagree with virtually everything he wrote.
On 11/27/2013 7:27 PM, [email protected] wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Nov 2013 19:56:11 -0500, Bill <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> [email protected] wrote:
>>> On Wed, 27 Nov 2013 19:33:43 -0500, Bill <[email protected]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Bill wrote:
>>>>> I was looking at parts diagram for a 2002 Unisaw. <snip>
>>>> It just takes one other person to makes an auction difficult, and he
>>>> was there (he probably thinking the same thing)! We had to go from $500
>>>> to $1050 before I convinced this person I was pretty serious about
>>>> getting a saw! And that's the dollar amount I payed--$1050+10% +7%
>>>> (sales tax), in case anyone is curious. I felt like I didn't want to do
>>>> any more saw shopping--and this one was only about 5 miles from home--so
>>>> I thought beforehand that it wasn't going to get any easier. I met a
>>>> kind person who helped me get the saw home on his trailer--I had talked
>>>> with him for 10 or 15 minutes before they got to auctioning the
>>>> machinery. While I was collecting parts in a plastic garbage bag that I
>>>> brought with me for the occasion, he asked me if I needed any help
>>>> moving the saw. And I said yes, please. And he said, where's your truck.
>>>> And I said, I don't have a truck. Can we put in in yours?--I said I
>>>> live close by and I will be glad to give you $100 to help me. His
>>>> trailer featured a hand-powered winch-which was handy pulling it up and
>>>> letting it down some improvised ramps. He did a lot of work though,
>>>> securing the saw. He got he out of a "tough jam". I thanked him and
>>>> tried to hand him $100, buy him a tank or two of gas, etc. but he would
>>>> only take $5 for gas. A nice guy who made a real difference, like many
>>>> of you folks.
>>> Sounds like a really nice guy. Do you have his name/address? You
>>> might try sending him something for the holidays (something a little
>>> nicer than a fruitcake ;-), with a note thanking him again.
>> Yes, you don't need to tell me that. Who doesn't like fruitcake?
>
> Everyone likes it so much they pass it on to their friends!
>
>>> You'll love the saw. Now you need a good miter gauge (the Delta
>>> sucks) and a few Forrest blades. ;-)
>> I'm glad because I don't have a miter guage. The saw guard, with it's
>> splitter, and 3 insert plates (in all) were found before the sale.
>
> I find the guard almost useless. If I'm doing nothing but ripping for
> a week, I might think about putting it on. I don't like not being
> able to see the blade clearly but the dust collector works better with
> it on. ;-) I use the knife whenever I'm making through cuts, though.
>
> You'll use the inserts. You'll probably want to buy more, if you do a
> lot of dado cuts. Did I mention that Forrest makes a nice dado set?
> ;-)
>
> I really like my JessEm miter gauge (JessEm makes great stuff). The
> Incra 1000HD is really nice, too, though not as solid.
I probably would have bought the JessEm to replace the Kreg that I had
but JessEm no longer makes that tank of a miter gauge.
>
On 11/26/2013 8:23 AM, Swingman wrote:
> On 11/25/2013 9:05 PM, Bill wrote:
>> Based on the date (2002), I think it's Model 36-841.
>
> Yep, that shows a different splitter than mine. Mine is a one knob
> affair that goes off and on in less than ten seconds.
>
> Since I don't use the blade guard, but I do use the splitter, I cut the
> kickback pawls off the splitter and made it short enough that I can
> leave it on for sled crosscuts, which is about 95% of crosscutting I do
> in the shop.
No redirect
https://picasaweb.google.com/111355467778981859077/EWoodShopJustStuff?noredirect=1#5850516674541872338
> And it still provides ample kickback protection for rip cuts.
>
--
eWoodShop: www.eWoodShop.com
Wood Shop: www.e-WoodShop.net
google.com/+KarlCaillouet
http://www.custommade.com/by/ewoodshop/
KarlCaillouet@ (the obvious)
On 12/17/2013 4:47 PM, Sonny wrote:
> On Tuesday, December 17, 2013 4:27:16 PM UTC-6, Bill wrote:
>> Sonny, Thank you for the download! >> >
>
> YW. Having to download 8 issues of ShopNotes, for just a few pages, seems impractical. Then, some of the left edge of the pages (discussion), on that download, were blurred.
>
> Maybe Jeff can find something better, if Leon doesn't beat him to it.
>
> If you wait a bit, after I win the MegaMillions pot, I'll buy you a blade guard of your choice, tomorrow.
>
> Sonny
>
done deal a few hours ago! ;~)
On 12/18/2013 10:48 AM, Bill wrote:
> Doug Miller wrote:
>> Bill <[email protected]> wrote in
>> news:[email protected]:
>>
>>> There is some inspiration to be gleaned from the one of this page of
>>> Grizzly's catalog (bottom of page):
>>> http://www.grizzly.com/catalog/2013/Main/13
>> Dust hose attaches in the wrong place. To do any good at all, the dust
>> hose needs to attach at
>> the *front* of the blade guard, not the rear.
>>
>
> That makes sense now. How could they have got that wrong (just
> rhetorical question)?
> Thanks Doug.
>
> Bill
Well It may not be wrong, SawStop claims extreme efficiency with their
guard and the hose is at the rear. It all depends on the turbulence and
flow inside the guard.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IJEi_lWGeLs
I have the SawStop but don't use the guard at all, If I was worried
about the little bit that comes out on top of the table I would probably
use the guard but IMHO it is not enough to worry about since you are not
going to get all of it anyway.
But having said all of that, the vast majority of the saw dust goes
down inside the saw. Your sander, if used with out a vacuum, might
produce more dust than the top side of the saw with out guard dust
collection.
Just saying, it might be a lot of trouble to try to catch 10% of the
dust on top.
On 11/26/2013 12:30 PM, Jim Weisgram wrote:
> Riving knife? Much safer than a splitter because it always hugs the
> blade. You are aware that you can't retrofit a riving knife to a saw
> that came without one? Unless you manage to fabricate it yourself
> somehow. Which would then void your "warranty".
Yep, you can:
http://theborkstore.com/
http://s20.photobucket.com/user/bacsibob/media/BORK-BBG-Hinge-3-10-12004.mp4.html
--
eWoodShop: www.eWoodShop.com
Wood Shop: www.e-WoodShop.net
google.com/+KarlCaillouet
http://www.custommade.com/by/ewoodshop/
KarlCaillouet@ (the obvious)
On 11/28/2013 9:01 AM, Sonny wrote:
> On Wednesday, November 27, 2013 9:47:25 PM UTC-6, Bill wrote:
>> I should read the manual too, because I learned some things while I was scanning it. In particular that the blades should be locked before the saw is turned on.
>
> And don't torque the lock knobs (height and angle) really tight. Firm tightening, but not super tight. You'll learn and get the feel for sufficient tightening. With my older '81 saw, the "tightening" of the heigth knob has worn, a bit, probably from over tightening.
>
> Three finger firm tightening, if this defines my experience, reasonably.
>
> Sonny
>
Agreed, My saw height wheel will spin during operation if the handle is
near the top and on the left side of center. It is the weight of the
handle that makes it come down. Not on the right side because that also
raises the assembly.
Any way I find tight enough so that the wheel does not turn on its own.
On 12/17/2013 7:41 PM, Bill wrote:
> woodchucker wrote:
>>
>> Bill, while not much better than what Sonny had, I like the hood
>> better. Not the arm.. I think if you marry Sonny's and this together
>> you would likely come out with a nice unit.
>> You might even marry some pvc into the support arm (along with the
>> pipe for some dust extraction).
>>
>> See the alt binaries.
>>
> I agree that the 2" dust collection is most-surely superior to the "trim
> attachment. For former design used 3/8" Lexan too (compared to 1/8").
> It seems like it would even work better if the vacuum hose is attached
> over the rear of the blade.
No, most of the dust gets thrown to you, so to the front is better.
>
> Barring a ceiling attachment, it seems like 2 separate configurations
> are required to avoid most conflicts (one from the left, and one from
> the right). Furthermore, it should be fast and easy to alternate
> between them.
You don't need both. Most of the goods you cut will be flat. But when
you are tenoning or cutting splintes the arm will be in the way. The
right side attachment extending to the left is pretty standard for a reason.
>
> And it might use EMT since I have 4 or 5 pieces laying on the floor! : )
> Imagine a giant C-Clamp with a "blade guard hood" attached to it. Maybe
> the C could just be "swung" out of the way? As many say, "The devil is
> in the details...".
>
Consider large EMT so that it does the dust collection. Not your EMT
that you used to wire the place. That would work for just supporting it,
but consider putting the dust collection through the support just the
way a store bought unit works. Attach an elbow and you are good to go.
> Bill
--
Jeff
On Tue, 26 Nov 2013 20:25:20 -0500, Bill <[email protected]>
wrote:
>Bill wrote:
>> I was looking at parts diagram for a 2002 Unisaw that I located that
>> didn't have a blade guard or splitter. ...
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Bill
>
>As it turns out, the stand for the saw is actually setting on it's table
>top. %-)
>
>Am I likely to have much success moving things around with a crowbar and
>some pieces of twobyfour?
Just pick it up!
Seriously, you should be able to flip it over without too much
trouble. Try pushing sideways on the stand. I wouldn't put a crowbar
to the top.
>
>I have the names of some folks who may be able to contract for help if I
>am the high bidder. I'm just not sure if I trust them (to not lift it
>by the top).
You shouldn't need to lift it at all. Rock it back and forth. Use
2x4 shims to get it high enough to get it on a dolly.
>I'm planning for at least 45 seconds of excitement for tomorrow! : )
>No! Not a hot date.
Glutton!
On 12/9/2013 2:21 PM, Bill wrote:
> Mike Marlow, I bought some Grade 5 (instead of Grade 8) bolts and nuts
> today just so I wouldn't have to wait anymore for them.
>
> This message isn't indexed in precisely the write location, but we're
> not all writing for posterity.
>
>
> Thinking more about push-sticks and table saws-- What are the chances
> that an errant pushstick will yank one's hand towards the blade? Hmmm...
>
> Maybe should build one of those that look like a plane?
>
> I have been reading the older book, Cabinet Making and Millwork, by John
> Feirer. It seemed to get more interesting when he got to the subject of
> table saws. Coincidentally, I'm sure, I'm on page 285--"Pushsticks"
> (only 600 pages to go...lol).
>
> Cheers,
> Bill
Two best push sticks... the GRIPPER
Home made type that is used for thin sock... some thin piece of ply or
wood that has a hook on the back to push the piece through.
Your hand will never be pushed toward the blade unless you use those
crappy plastic push pads that can lean over...
--
Jeff
On Mon, 25 Nov 2013 20:33:29 -0500, Bill <[email protected]>
wrote:
>I was looking at parts diagram for a 2002 Unisaw that I located that
>didn't have a blade guard or splitter. I was surprised. From the parts
>diagram it looks like a real pain to remove the splitter (2 screws,
>sideways?). Not only that it would cost $150 to obtain this part.
>Maybe I've already deduced why it's "not present"?
A riving knife for it doesn't cost that much. I have a 2009 Unisaw
and rarely use the blade giard. The knife is great, though.
>
>Thee may be value in a riving knife instead? FWIW, this saw has a
>Unifence that didn't move as smoothly as other fences I've seen, it
>needed to be "palm tapped"--but that detail doesn't seem so critical.
>Maybe it just needs wax? It locked solid however (though it is Aluminum
>and may flex a little--you can see I've been reading! ;) )
Go for the knife. It's a little dodgy installing but it works great.
Which fence?
>Looks like it may either be this saw or a new Grizzly G0691. Does
>Grizzly have a "great feeling" fence or just so-so? After all is said
>and done, the cost of delivery of both saws is about the same(which
>improves the price of the Grizzly, relatively speaking).
I had the same choice in '09. The Unisaw won hands down.
On Wed, 27 Nov 2013 20:48:47 -0500, Bill <[email protected]>
wrote:
>[email protected] wrote:
>> You'll use the inserts. You'll probably want to buy more, if you do a
>> lot of dado cuts. Did I mention that Forrest makes a nice dado set?
>> ;-)
> I already bought a Freud dado set, with Rockler's 20% off coupon a few
>months ago--anticipating that I would one day own a saw. What I need is
>a suitable 230W adapter/plug-inlet for the wall. The one I already
>purchased doesn't fit the horizontally-slotted plug. That's the sort of
>problem you may run into with anticipatory purchases...
I replaced the cord on mine to fit the outlet I installed. I don't
even remember that it came with a plug, though.
>> I really like my JessEm miter gauge (JessEm makes great stuff). The
>> Incra 1000HD is really nice, too, though not as solid.
>Amazon had the Incra 1000HD on sale for about $110 during last Christmas
>season. I'll let you know if I see it.
>If you doubt me, check camelcamelcamel.com (I haven't checked, I may be
>off by a few dollars).
I don't doubt you. I've seen Incra stuff pretty deeply discounted.
It's a great price (I think I paid just under $200, a few years ago).
Be careful with it. At extreme angles, watch the trailing edge of the
fence. It hangs out into the saw, unless you readjust (and
recalibrate) it after changing the angle. DAMHIKT.
On Monday, December 16, 2013 11:14:43 PM UTC-6, Bill wrote:
> Bill wrote: > ShopNotes "Dust-Free Blade Guard" in 1997 (Volume 16, Issue 92).
Depending on your download speed, it may take a few minutes to download the whole issue.
http://metosexpo.free.fr/extra/wood_ebooks/shopnotes/ShopNotes%20-%20Vol.%2087%20to%2095/ShopNotes%20-%20Vol.%2087%20to%2095/Shopnotes%20%2392%20(Vol%2016)%20-%20Before%20&%20After%20Shop%20Makeover.pdf
Sonny
On Wed, 18 Dec 2013 18:38:24 -0500, Bill <[email protected]>
wrote:
>Leon wrote:
>> On 12/18/2013 10:48 AM, Bill wrote:
>>> Doug Miller wrote:
>>>> Bill <[email protected]> wrote in
>>>> news:[email protected]:
>>>>
>>>>> There is some inspiration to be gleaned from the one of this page of
>>>>> Grizzly's catalog (bottom of page):
>>>>> http://www.grizzly.com/catalog/2013/Main/13
>>>> Dust hose attaches in the wrong place. To do any good at all, the dust
>>>> hose needs to attach at
>>>> the *front* of the blade guard, not the rear.
>>>>
>>>
>>> That makes sense now. How could they have got that wrong (just
>>> rhetorical question)?
>>> Thanks Doug.
>>>
>>> Bill
>>
>> Well It may not be wrong, SawStop claims extreme efficiency with their
>> guard and the hose is at the rear. It all depends on the turbulence
>> and flow inside the guard.
>>
>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IJEi_lWGeLs
>
>Someone posted in the comments section of that video, that the person in
>the video is "standing on the wrong side of the fence". What do you think?
It may be the "wrong side" in someone's mind but it sure looks right
to me. If there is a kick-back, he's not going to get bloody. I
*try* to work from that side of the fence.
On Wed, 27 Nov 2013 19:56:11 -0500, Bill <[email protected]>
wrote:
>[email protected] wrote:
>> On Wed, 27 Nov 2013 19:33:43 -0500, Bill <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Bill wrote:
>>>> I was looking at parts diagram for a 2002 Unisaw. <snip>
>>> It just takes one other person to makes an auction difficult, and he
>>> was there (he probably thinking the same thing)! We had to go from $500
>>> to $1050 before I convinced this person I was pretty serious about
>>> getting a saw! And that's the dollar amount I payed--$1050+10% +7%
>>> (sales tax), in case anyone is curious. I felt like I didn't want to do
>>> any more saw shopping--and this one was only about 5 miles from home--so
>>> I thought beforehand that it wasn't going to get any easier. I met a
>>> kind person who helped me get the saw home on his trailer--I had talked
>>> with him for 10 or 15 minutes before they got to auctioning the
>>> machinery. While I was collecting parts in a plastic garbage bag that I
>>> brought with me for the occasion, he asked me if I needed any help
>>> moving the saw. And I said yes, please. And he said, where's your truck.
>>> And I said, I don't have a truck. Can we put in in yours?--I said I
>>> live close by and I will be glad to give you $100 to help me. His
>>> trailer featured a hand-powered winch-which was handy pulling it up and
>>> letting it down some improvised ramps. He did a lot of work though,
>>> securing the saw. He got he out of a "tough jam". I thanked him and
>>> tried to hand him $100, buy him a tank or two of gas, etc. but he would
>>> only take $5 for gas. A nice guy who made a real difference, like many
>>> of you folks.
>> Sounds like a really nice guy. Do you have his name/address? You
>> might try sending him something for the holidays (something a little
>> nicer than a fruitcake ;-), with a note thanking him again.
>Yes, you don't need to tell me that. Who doesn't like fruitcake?
Everyone likes it so much they pass it on to their friends!
>> You'll love the saw. Now you need a good miter gauge (the Delta
>> sucks) and a few Forrest blades. ;-)
>I'm glad because I don't have a miter guage. The saw guard, with it's
>splitter, and 3 insert plates (in all) were found before the sale.
I find the guard almost useless. If I'm doing nothing but ripping for
a week, I might think about putting it on. I don't like not being
able to see the blade clearly but the dust collector works better with
it on. ;-) I use the knife whenever I'm making through cuts, though.
You'll use the inserts. You'll probably want to buy more, if you do a
lot of dado cuts. Did I mention that Forrest makes a nice dado set?
;-)
I really like my JessEm miter gauge (JessEm makes great stuff). The
Incra 1000HD is really nice, too, though not as solid.
>Also got an extra mobile stand out of the deal! What can I buy for it,
>Mike M.? : )
Use it for another tool? I don't think you'd get enough for it to
bother selling it.
On Wed, 27 Nov 2013 22:47:25 -0500, Bill <[email protected]>
wrote:
>woodchucker wrote:
>> Congratulations Bill. Good luck with your new saw.
>
>Thank you!
>
>> Give it a thorough look over. Clean it up..
>Yes, it needs a bit of cleaning up, and that will help me to familiarize
>myself with it. I should read the manual too, because I learned some
>things while I was scanning it. In particular that the blades should be
>locked before the saw is turned on. It makes sense, but I didn't know
>that already.
LOL!
>I have some 400 and 600 wet or dry. Thank you for
>mentioning that (below).
I prefer the ScotchBrite pads or steel wool. The Boeshield rust
remover works really well if you have a little rust.
>> you can use 400 to 600 wet dry sandpaper, for the top, or a green
>> scotch brite.. cut it round and use your random orbital sander...
>> wax it using butcher wax and enjoy.
I've been using Boeshield but will probably switch to TopKote soon.
>> Build yourself a cross cut sled for 90degree cuts and look for the
>> incra miter on sale for angled cuts.
>>
>> And go make something.. build some jigs to learn how to use the tool
>> before you tackle your first big project.
>>
>Yes, I will!
Watch the blade! Really, watch it. It'll jump out and find your
fingers if you don't keep an eye on it.
On 11/28/2013 10:01 AM, Sonny wrote:
> On Wednesday, November 27, 2013 9:47:25 PM UTC-6, Bill wrote:
>> I should read the manual too, because I learned some things while I was scanning it. In particular that the blades should be locked before the saw is turned on.
>
> And don't torque the lock knobs (height and angle) really tight. Firm tightening, but not super tight. You'll learn and get the feel for sufficient tightening. With my older '81 saw, the "tightening" of the heigth knob has worn, a bit, probably from over tightening.
>
> Three finger firm tightening, if this defines my experience, reasonably.
>
> Sonny
>
Yes absolutely, the is just to prevent the arbor from creeping. A slight
tightening does that. just snug it + a little more.
--
Jeff
On Mon, 25 Nov 2013 20:33:29 -0500, Bill <[email protected]>
wrote:
>I was looking at parts diagram for a 2002 Unisaw that I located that
>didn't have a blade guard or splitter. I was surprised. From the parts
>diagram it looks like a real pain to remove the splitter (2 screws,
>sideways?).
My splitter is like that, 2 bolts. Now they are wingnuts. Inside was.
another bolt to loosen/tighten; now it is a cam clamp.
Not only that it would cost $150 to obtain this part.
>Maybe I've already deduced why it's "not present"?
>
>Thee may be value in a riving knife instead? FWIW, this saw has a
>Unifence that didn't move as smoothly as other fences I've seen, it
>needed to be "palm tapped"--but that detail doesn't seem so critical.
>Maybe it just needs wax? It locked solid however (though it is Aluminum
>and may flex a little--you can see I've been reading! ;) )
Riving knife? Much safer than a splitter because it always hugs the
blade. You are aware that you can't retrofit a riving knife to a saw
that came without one? Unless you manage to fabricate it yourself
somehow. Which would then void your "warranty".
You can improve on the stock splitter with the Biesemeyer aftermarket
device assuming it works on your saw:
http://www.amazon.com/Biesemeyer-78-961-T-Square-Anti-Kickback-Unisaw-Right/dp/B000022613
Or a splitter/blade guard combo from Lee Styron might be just the
ticket for you:
http://leestyron.com/
>
>Looks like it may either be this saw or a new Grizzly G0691. Does
>Grizzly have a "great feeling" fence or just so-so? After all is said
>and done, the cost of delivery of both saws is about the same(which
>improves the price of the Grizzly, relatively speaking).
From viewing their web site, the Grizzly fence looks to have been
re-engineered from the one on my G1023. My lever handle is roughly
cast, the pic looks like a nicer looking arm. I would rate my fence as
"OK". It is quite solid. Waxing the table, rails, and pads on the
fence makes all the difference in terms of smooth sliding.
http://www.sawmillcreek.org/entry.php?108-Grizzly-G0691-Review
>> Jim
On Mon, 09 Dec 2013 14:21:04 -0500, Bill <[email protected]>
wrote:
>Mike Marlow, I bought some Grade 5 (instead of Grade 8) bolts and nuts
>today just so I wouldn't have to wait anymore for them.
>
>This message isn't indexed in precisely the write location, but we're
>not all writing for posterity.
>
>
>Thinking more about push-sticks and table saws-- What are the chances
>that an errant pushstick will yank one's hand towards the blade? Hmmm...
Exceedingly small. The rotation of the blade is towards you, so if
the stick gets tangled in the blade, it's coming back at you. It
might put your eye out, but it's unlikely to suck your fingers in. You
don't reach behind the blade, do you?
>Maybe should build one of those that look like a plane?
I have a couple I like. Both have notches so in addition to pushing I
can hold the back of the board against the table. Without this, the
stick can go under the board, causing it to rise. Kick-back is only a
millisecond of bad luck behind.
I keep one of the sticks on the fence and the other has a magnet and
sits stuck to the left side of the table. The idea is that they're
readily accessible when they're needed.
>I have been reading the older book, Cabinet Making and Millwork, by John
>Feirer. It seemed to get more interesting when he got to the subject of
>table saws. Coincidentally, I'm sure, I'm on page 285--"Pushsticks"
>(only 600 pages to go...lol).
On Tue, 26 Nov 2013 08:23:12 -0600, Swingman <[email protected]> wrote:
>On 11/25/2013 9:05 PM, Bill wrote:
>> Based on the date (2002), I think it's Model 36-841.
>
>Yep, that shows a different splitter than mine. Mine is a one knob
>affair that goes off and on in less than ten seconds.
>
>Since I don't use the blade guard, but I do use the splitter, I cut the
>kickback pawls off the splitter and made it short enough that I can
>leave it on for sled crosscuts, which is about 95% of crosscutting I do
>in the shop.
>
>https://picasaweb.google.com/111355467778981859077/EWoodShopJustStuff#5850516674541872338
>
>And it still provides ample kickback protection for rip cuts.
I've got a late 90's Unisaw with the the Besemeyer fence and overhead
guard with the same splitter. Looking at the manual for the overhead
guard it looks like the splitter and the thumb nut set up are
available parts that came with the overhead guard.
Mike M
Swingman wrote:
> Bill <[email protected]> wrote:
>> I was looking at parts diagram for a 2002 Unisaw that I located that
>> didn't have a blade guard or splitter. I was surprised. From the parts
>> diagram it looks like a real pain to remove the splitter (2 screws,
>> sideways?). Not only that it would cost $150 to obtain this part.
>> Maybe I've already deduced why it's "not present"?
>>
>> Thee may be value in a riving knife instead? FWIW, this saw has a
>> Unifence that didn't move as smoothly as other fences I've seen, it
>> needed to be "palm tapped"--but that detail doesn't seem so critical.
>> Maybe it just needs wax? It locked solid however (though it is Aluminum
>> and may flex a little--you can see I've been reading! ;) )
>>
>> Looks like it may either be this saw or a new Grizzly G0691. Does
>> Grizzly have a "great feeling" fence or just so-so? After all is said
>> and done, the cost of delivery of both saws is about the same(which
>> improves the price of the Grizzly, relatively speaking).
> Model number? Lots of different Unisaws in the early nineties.
>
The model number on the cabinet is 36-829, which I've since learned is
the model number of the *cabinet*. %-)
The serial number begins 02B, which places it in February, 2002 I think.
It's not a "Platinum edition", it's plain, but it has a little sticker
"USA stripes" on the lower right.
Electric is on left side, motor cover on right side (underneath, not on
the outside), saw is RT.
It's 83" long with Unifence. Based on the date (2002), I think it's
Model 36-841.
Swingman wrote:
> Bill <[email protected]> wrote:
>> I was looking at parts diagram for a 2002 Unisaw that I located that
>> didn't have a blade guard or splitter.
>>
>> Thee may be value in a riving knife instead? FWIW, this saw has a
>> Unifence that didn't move as smoothly as other fences I've seen, it
>> needed to be "palm tapped"--but that detail doesn't seem so critical.
>> Maybe it just needs wax? It locked solid however (though it is Aluminum
>> and may flex a little--you can see I've been reading! ;)
> Don't let the Unifence deter you. Very flexible:
>
> http://www.amazon.com/Uni-t-fence-Table-Fence-Peachtree-Woodworking/dp/B001LYHYH6
Thanks, I save a link to that. The product reviews back you up.
> Works great with the delta Unifence. Been using one for ten years and
> recommend it. Great for jigs and easy add ons, like sacrificial fences.
> Only caveat is that the Unifence doesn't work well with "hold downs" (board
> buddies), which I don't use in any event.
>
On 11/26/2013 9:23 AM, Swingman wrote:
> On 11/25/2013 9:05 PM, Bill wrote:
>> Based on the date (2002), I think it's Model 36-841.
>
> Yep, that shows a different splitter than mine. Mine is a one knob
> affair that goes off and on in less than ten seconds.
>
> Since I don't use the blade guard, but I do use the splitter, I cut the
> kickback pawls off the splitter and made it short enough that I can
> leave it on for sled crosscuts, which is about 95% of crosscutting I do
> in the shop.
>
> https://picasaweb.google.com/111355467778981859077/EWoodShopJustStuff#5850516674541872338
>
>
> And it still provides ample kickback protection for rip cuts.
>
Thanks for the pic. I will look closer next time I see the saw. I will
bring a small flashlight too! : )
Swingman wrote:
>> Since I don't use the blade guard, but I do use the splitter, I cut
>> the kickback pawls off the splitter and made it short enough that I
>> can leave it on for sled crosscuts, which is about 95% of
>> crosscutting I do in the shop.
>
> No redirect
>
> https://picasaweb.google.com/111355467778981859077/EWoodShopJustStuff?noredirect=1#5850516674541872338
>
>
Karl - how deep is your sled (front to back)? I'm thinking of a sled as I
get older and wiser and have been mulling over just how deep to build one.
--
-Mike-
[email protected]
Swingman wrote:
> On 11/26/2013 11:43 AM, Mike Marlow wrote:
>> Swingman wrote:
>>
>>>> Since I don't use the blade guard, but I do use the splitter, I cut
>>>> the kickback pawls off the splitter and made it short enough that I
>>>> can leave it on for sled crosscuts, which is about 95% of
>>>> crosscutting I do in the shop.
>>>
>>> No redirect
>>>
>>> https://picasaweb.google.com/111355467778981859077/EWoodShopJustStuff?noredirect=1#5850516674541872338
>>>
>
>>
>> Karl - how deep is your sled (front to back)? I'm thinking of a sled
>> as I
>> get older and wiser and have been mulling over just how deep to build
>> one.
>
> I have a few of various sizes. The one in the photo I use the most and
> will cut a 13" wide panel, so it is about 13 1/4" deep.
>
Look at the splitter on the 2002 (look towards the bottom of the pdf).
Was it a new innovation at the time?
http://web.newsguy.com/MySite/Splitter.pdf
Bill
> I chose that dimension specifically because it is comfortable to use,
> not unwieldy, works well with the width of the front edge of the table
> saw table to the blade, can be stored under the front rail of table
> saw, and allows me to cut, among less wide parts, wall cabinet end
> panels, which are generally a standard 11 1/2" (FF) to 12" (Frameless)
> wide.
>
> I do have much bigger ones, for larger panel crosscuts, miter cuts,
> and dado cuts, but that one is used almost exclusively for all shop
> crosscuts that will fit in it.
>
Swingman wrote:
> On 11/26/2013 1:43 PM, Bill wrote:
>> Look at the splitter on the 2002 (look towards the bottom of the pdf).
>> Was it a new innovation at the time?
>
> I think Mike M is correct. I bought the saw without an overhead guard,
> purchased and installed one later, but I do not recall exactly the
> splitter setup that came stock ... been a long time.
>
> Which means that somewhere in this shop is another splitter? And
> where, beats the helloutta me.
>
> I'll have to get the manuals down from a top shelf and take a look.
>
> I installed the overhead guard, a two man job, by myself, and ended up
> with 13 stitches in my right thumb during the installation.
OUCH! : (
>
> That I do remember, which may be why I have forgotten what came
> before. ;)
>
Swingman wrote:
> I have a few of various sizes. The one in the photo I use the most and
> will cut a 13" wide panel, so it is about 13 1/4" deep.
>
> I chose that dimension specifically because it is comfortable to use,
> not unwieldy, works well with the width of the front edge of the table
> saw table to the blade, can be stored under the front rail of table
> saw, and allows me to cut, among less wide parts, wall cabinet end
> panels, which are generally a standard 11 1/2" (FF) to 12"
> (Frameless) wide.
> I do have much bigger ones, for larger panel crosscuts, miter cuts,
> and dado cuts, but that one is used almost exclusively for all shop
> crosscuts that will fit in it.
Thank you! That is a perfect answer. I know I'll grow my arsenal, but I
was looking for that one starting point. Very helpful - thanks again.
--
-Mike-
[email protected]
Jim Weisgram wrote:
>
> Riving knife? Much safer than a splitter because it always hugs the
> blade. You are aware that you can't retrofit a riving knife to a saw
> that came without one? Unless you manage to fabricate it yourself
> somehow. Which would then void your "warranty".
>
Indeed - much safer than a splitter. Void your warranty? Not at all
necessarily. Most older saws don't even have a warrnaty in place, but even
for newer saws that my have one, installing a riving knife need not
necessarily void the warranty.
--
-Mike-
[email protected]
Bill wrote:
> Swingman wrote:
>> On 11/26/2013 11:43 AM, Mike Marlow wrote:
>>> Swingman wrote:
>>>
>>>>> Since I don't use the blade guard, but I do use the splitter, I
>>>>> cut the kickback pawls off the splitter and made it short enough
>>>>> that I can leave it on for sled crosscuts, which is about 95% of
>>>>> crosscutting I do in the shop.
>>>>
>>>> No redirect
>>>>
>>>> https://picasaweb.google.com/111355467778981859077/EWoodShopJustStuff?noredirect=1#5850516674541872338
>>>>
>>
>>>
>>> Karl - how deep is your sled (front to back)? I'm thinking of a
>>> sled as I
>>> get older and wiser and have been mulling over just how deep to
>>> build one.
>>
>> I have a few of various sizes. The one in the photo I use the most
>> and will cut a 13" wide panel, so it is about 13 1/4" deep.
>>
> Look at the splitter on the 2002 (look towards the bottom of the pdf).
> Was it a new innovation at the time?
>
> http://web.newsguy.com/MySite/Splitter.pdf
>
Not a new innovation at all (even at the time) Bill - in fact, quite the
opposite. But a splitter is different than what I asked Karl about in the
above referenced quote. Perhaps you confused an earlier post from Karl
about splitters.
--
-Mike-
[email protected]
Mike Marlow wrote:
> Bill wrote:
>> Swingman wrote:
>>> On 11/26/2013 11:43 AM, Mike Marlow wrote:
>>>> Swingman wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> Since I don't use the blade guard, but I do use the splitter, I
>>>>>> cut the kickback pawls off the splitter and made it short enough
>>>>>> that I can leave it on for sled crosscuts, which is about 95% of
>>>>>> crosscutting I do in the shop.
>>>>> No redirect
>>>>>
>>>>> https://picasaweb.google.com/111355467778981859077/EWoodShopJustStuff?noredirect=1#5850516674541872338
>>>>>
>>>> Karl - how deep is your sled (front to back)? I'm thinking of a
>>>> sled as I
>>>> get older and wiser and have been mulling over just how deep to
>>>> build one.
>>> I have a few of various sizes. The one in the photo I use the most
>>> and will cut a 13" wide panel, so it is about 13 1/4" deep.
>>>
>> Look at the splitter on the 2002 (look towards the bottom of the pdf).
>> Was it a new innovation at the time?
>>
>> http://web.newsguy.com/MySite/Splitter.pdf
>>
> Not a new innovation at all (even at the time) Bill - in fact, quite the
> opposite. But a splitter is different than what I asked Karl about in the
> above referenced quote. Perhaps you confused an earlier post from Karl
> about splitters.
>
Sorry, I put it under the link he posted. I was not meaning to tromp on
your conversation.
Bill wrote:
> I was looking at parts diagram for a 2002 Unisaw that I located that
> didn't have a blade guard or splitter. ...
>
> Cheers,
> Bill
As it turns out, the stand for the saw is actually setting on it's table
top. %-)
Am I likely to have much success moving things around with a crowbar and
some pieces of twobyfour?
I have the names of some folks who may be able to contract for help if I
am the high bidder. I'm just not sure if I trust them (to not lift it
by the top).
I'm planning for at least 45 seconds of excitement for tomorrow! : )
No! Not a hot date.
Bill
Bill wrote:
> I was looking at parts diagram for a 2002 Unisaw. <snip>
It just takes one other person to makes an auction difficult, and he
was there (he probably thinking the same thing)! We had to go from $500
to $1050 before I convinced this person I was pretty serious about
getting a saw! And that's the dollar amount I payed--$1050+10% +7%
(sales tax), in case anyone is curious. I felt like I didn't want to do
any more saw shopping--and this one was only about 5 miles from home--so
I thought beforehand that it wasn't going to get any easier. I met a
kind person who helped me get the saw home on his trailer--I had talked
with him for 10 or 15 minutes before they got to auctioning the
machinery. While I was collecting parts in a plastic garbage bag that I
brought with me for the occasion, he asked me if I needed any help
moving the saw. And I said yes, please. And he said, where's your truck.
And I said, I don't have a truck. Can we put in in yours?--I said I
live close by and I will be glad to give you $100 to help me. His
trailer featured a hand-powered winch-which was handy pulling it up and
letting it down some improvised ramps. He did a lot of work though,
securing the saw. He got he out of a "tough jam". I thanked him and
tried to hand him $100, buy him a tank or two of gas, etc. but he would
only take $5 for gas. A nice guy who made a real difference, like many
of you folks.
Bill
[email protected] wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Nov 2013 19:33:43 -0500, Bill <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> Bill wrote:
>>> I was looking at parts diagram for a 2002 Unisaw. <snip>
>> It just takes one other person to makes an auction difficult, and he
>> was there (he probably thinking the same thing)! We had to go from $500
>> to $1050 before I convinced this person I was pretty serious about
>> getting a saw! And that's the dollar amount I payed--$1050+10% +7%
>> (sales tax), in case anyone is curious. I felt like I didn't want to do
>> any more saw shopping--and this one was only about 5 miles from home--so
>> I thought beforehand that it wasn't going to get any easier. I met a
>> kind person who helped me get the saw home on his trailer--I had talked
>> with him for 10 or 15 minutes before they got to auctioning the
>> machinery. While I was collecting parts in a plastic garbage bag that I
>> brought with me for the occasion, he asked me if I needed any help
>> moving the saw. And I said yes, please. And he said, where's your truck.
>> And I said, I don't have a truck. Can we put in in yours?--I said I
>> live close by and I will be glad to give you $100 to help me. His
>> trailer featured a hand-powered winch-which was handy pulling it up and
>> letting it down some improvised ramps. He did a lot of work though,
>> securing the saw. He got he out of a "tough jam". I thanked him and
>> tried to hand him $100, buy him a tank or two of gas, etc. but he would
>> only take $5 for gas. A nice guy who made a real difference, like many
>> of you folks.
> Sounds like a really nice guy. Do you have his name/address? You
> might try sending him something for the holidays (something a little
> nicer than a fruitcake ;-), with a note thanking him again.
Yes, you don't need to tell me that. Who doesn't like fruitcake?
>
>
> You'll love the saw. Now you need a good miter gauge (the Delta
> sucks) and a few Forrest blades. ;-)
I'm glad because I don't have a miter guage. The saw guard, with it's
splitter, and 3 insert plates (in all) were found before the sale.
Also got an extra mobile stand out of the deal! What can I buy for it,
Mike M.? : )
[email protected] wrote:
> You'll use the inserts. You'll probably want to buy more, if you do a
> lot of dado cuts. Did I mention that Forrest makes a nice dado set?
> ;-)
I already bought a Freud dado set, with Rockler's 20% off coupon a few
months ago--anticipating that I would one day own a saw. What I need is
a suitable 230W adapter/plug-inlet for the wall. The one I already
purchased doesn't fit the horizontally-slotted plug. That's the sort of
problem you may run into with anticipatory purchases...
>
> I really like my JessEm miter gauge (JessEm makes great stuff). The
> Incra 1000HD is really nice, too, though not as solid.
Amazon had the Incra 1000HD on sale for about $110 during last Christmas
season. I'll let you know if I see it.
If you doubt me, check camelcamelcamel.com (I haven't checked, I may be
off by a few dollars).
Bill
>
Bill wrote:
> Bill wrote:
>> I was looking at parts diagram for a 2002 Unisaw. <snip>
> It just takes one other person to makes an auction difficult, and he
> was there (he probably thinking the same thing)! We had to go from
> $500 to $1050 before I convinced this person I was pretty serious
> about getting a saw! And that's the dollar amount I payed--$1050+10%
> +7% (sales tax), in case anyone is curious. I felt like I didn't
> want to do any more saw shopping--and this one was only about 5 miles
> from home--so I thought beforehand that it wasn't going to get any
> easier. I met a kind person who helped me get the saw home on his
> trailer--I had talked with him for 10 or 15 minutes before they got
> to auctioning the machinery. While I was collecting parts in a
> plastic garbage bag that I brought with me for the occasion, he asked
> me if I needed any help moving the saw. And I said yes, please. And
> he said, where's your truck. And I said, I don't have a truck. Can
> we put in in yours?--I said I live close by and I will be glad to
> give you $100 to help me. His trailer featured a hand-powered
> winch-which was handy pulling it up and letting it down some
> improvised ramps. He did a lot of work though, securing the saw. He
> got he out of a "tough jam". I thanked him and tried to hand him
> $100, buy him a tank or two of gas, etc. but he would only take $5
> for gas. A nice guy who made a real difference, like many of you
> folks.
> Bill
Great day Bill!
--
-Mike-
[email protected]
Bill wrote:
> I'm glad because I don't have a miter guage. The saw guard, with
> it's splitter, and 3 insert plates (in all) were found before the
> sale. Also got an extra mobile stand out of the deal! What can I buy
> for it, Mike M.? : )
Buy for it? Hell, you did great as it is. The question you should be
asking is more like "what other tool can I go out and buy now that I saved
all this money on these parts they found?". You don't have to rush
decisions like this...
--
-Mike-
[email protected]
woodchucker wrote:
> Congratulations Bill. Good luck with your new saw.
Thank you!
> Give it a thorough look over. Clean it up..
Yes, it needs a bit of cleaning up, and that will help me to familiarize
myself with it. I should read the manual too, because I learned some
things while I was scanning it. In particular that the blades should be
locked before the saw is turned on. It makes sense, but I didn't know
that already. I have some 400 and 600 wet or dry. Thank you for
mentioning that (below).
> you can use 400 to 600 wet dry sandpaper, for the top, or a green
> scotch brite.. cut it round and use your random orbital sander...
> wax it using butcher wax and enjoy.
>
> Build yourself a cross cut sled for 90degree cuts and look for the
> incra miter on sale for angled cuts.
>
> And go make something.. build some jigs to learn how to use the tool
> before you tackle your first big project.
>
Yes, I will!
Mike Marlow wrote:
> Bill wrote:
>
>> I'm glad because I don't have a miter guage. The saw guard, with
>> it's splitter, and 3 insert plates (in all) were found before the
>> sale. Also got an extra mobile stand out of the deal! What can I buy
>> for it, Mike M.? : )
> Buy for it? Hell, you did great as it is. The question you should be
> asking is more like "what other tool can I go out and buy now that I saved
> all this money on these parts they found?".
: )
> You don't have to rush
> decisions like this...
>
Ah for the good old days, when if you had need of a part for a Delta
tool you would call them up, get a good old boy on the phone who would
know in about 60 seconds of conversation exactly what you needed, and
when you asked him the price and how much to ship, he's day, don't
worry about it, we;ll send you 2 of them for free!
They don't make customer service like they used too... Or the saws either
unfortunately.
--
The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation
with the average voter. (Winston Churchill)
Larry W. - Baltimore Maryland - lwasserm(a)sdf. lonestar. org
Lew Hodgett wrote:
> Bill wrote:
>
>> I was looking at parts diagram for a 2002 Unisaw that I located that
>> didn't have a blade guard or splitter. I was surprised.
> -------------------------------------------------------
> http://tinyurl.com/3uxteay
>
> Have used this device on a Unisaw and it not only functional, but easy
> to use.
>
> Easy to install, easy to remove when you don't need it.
Thank you, Lew! I just added it to my "wish list".
Bill
>
> Lew
>
>
>
Sonny wrote:
> On Wednesday, November 27, 2013 9:47:25 PM UTC-6, Bill wrote:
>> I should read the manual too, because I learned some things while I was scanning it. In particular that the blades should be locked before the saw is turned on.
> And don't torque the lock knobs (height and angle) really tight. Firm tightening, but not super tight. You'll learn and get the feel for sufficient tightening. With my older '81 saw, the "tightening" of the heigth knob has worn, a bit, probably from over tightening.
>
> Three finger firm tightening, if this defines my experience, reasonably.
Yes, I'm getting the hint with "set screws". Next time my bathroom sink
faucet starts to leak, I'll probably be buying new faucets instead of a
$1 rubber part. And that's at least the 2nd time, I've stripped a set
screw in recent history. I even bought a torque-wrench to help me curb
my neanderthalic-tendencies. And, in the one time I've used it so far
(for a lawn-mower spark plug), it may already have paid for itself.
Can I apply lithium grease on the internal parts corresponding to the
height/tilt wheels of the saw, or is there something more suitable for
this purpose?
Bill
>
> Sonny
[email protected] wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Nov 2013 20:48:47 -0500, Bill <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> [email protected] wrote:
>>> You'll use the inserts. You'll probably want to buy more, if you do a
>>> lot of dado cuts. Did I mention that Forrest makes a nice dado set?
>>> ;-)
>> I already bought a Freud dado set, with Rockler's 20% off coupon a few
>> months ago--anticipating that I would one day own a saw. What I need is
>> a suitable 230W adapter/plug-inlet for the wall. The one I already
>> purchased doesn't fit the horizontally-slotted plug. That's the sort of
>> problem you may run into with anticipatory purchases...
> I replaced the cord on mine to fit the outlet I installed. I don't
> even remember that it came with a plug, though.
>
>>> I really like my JessEm miter gauge (JessEm makes great stuff). The
>>> Incra 1000HD is really nice, too, though not as solid.
>> Amazon had the Incra 1000HD on sale for about $110 during last Christmas
>> season. I'll let you know if I see it.
>> If you doubt me, check camelcamelcamel.com (I haven't checked, I may be
>> off by a few dollars).
> I don't doubt you. I've seen Incra stuff pretty deeply discounted.
I double checked, it was $119.99 last year. At this point, just trying
to walk around my garage/shop is "an accident waiting to happen". I
need to flip the saw around, put it on it's proper stand, and put it
where it needs to go,etc.
Towards that goal, I noticed that Menards has this miter saw stand on
sale tomorrow for $29.99:
http://www.menards.com/main/see-more/dat-two-day-sale/portamate-miter-saw-stand/p-2180574-c-13916.htm
Sonny wrote:
> On Thursday, November 28, 2013 11:02:29 AM UTC-6, Bill wrote:
>> Can I apply lithium grease on the internal parts corresponding to the height/tilt wheels of the saw, or is there something more suitable for this purpose?
> Applying a lubricant to the large gears or teeth of the gears? There seems to be some difference of opinions about lubrcating those teeth/gears, similar to lubricating the threads on a wood vise screw.
>
> Some oils or grease tend to collect sawdust, adding to any potential problem for smooth operation. Clean, substance free gears/teeth or threads seems to work just fine, for me, though my saw's angle gear squeaks like hell, when cranking it. I suspect it's the shaft/support that squeaks, not the teeth/gears.
There is some squeaks. No functional problem that I am aware of. The
idea of putting grease onto the gears raised my caution flag too. I
suspect that the saw just hasn't been used in a while.
>
>
> I don't lubricate my gears and sawdust collects on them, anyway, but it's not "stuck" on. It's a lot easier blowing the dust off, with the air hose, if the dust is not stuck on by a lubricant. In my case, sawdust collecting on the gears/teeth is much more pronounced on the saw that is not attached to the DC.
>
> I would suggest you not lubricate the gears. If your experience suggests otherwise, then try lubricating and compare the results.
>
> Sonny
Bill wrote:
>
> Towards that goal, I noticed that Menards has this miter saw stand on
> sale tomorrow for $29.99:
> http://www.menards.com/main/see-more/dat-two-day-sale/portamate-miter-saw-stand/p-2180574-c-13916.htm
>
>
I did a little research and found this is the Portamate 3600, and I
compared it to the Portamate 4000. If it were the latter, I might bite.
My current miter saw configuration take up more space than it justifies
when I'm not using it.
Bill
Leon wrote:
>> On Thursday, November 28, 2013 11:02:29 AM UTC-6, Bill wrote:
>>> Can I apply lithium grease on the internal parts corresponding to
>>> the height/tilt wheels of the saw, or is there something more
>>> suitable for this purpose?
>>
> Lube the gears but don't use grease. I use TopCote. I suspect any
> one of these would work well.
>
> http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00D3IDV8E/ref=asc_df_B00D3IDV8E2852865?smid=A19VW1BL9ZXZVA&tag=dealtmp336018-20&linkCode=asn&creative=395105&creativeASIN=B00D3IDV8E
>
Thank you. I will investigate further. I need to "get in there" with a
vacuum cleaner and a flashlight!
Bill
Mike Marlow, I bought some Grade 5 (instead of Grade 8) bolts and nuts
today just so I wouldn't have to wait anymore for them.
This message isn't indexed in precisely the write location, but we're
not all writing for posterity.
Thinking more about push-sticks and table saws-- What are the chances
that an errant pushstick will yank one's hand towards the blade? Hmmm...
Maybe should build one of those that look like a plane?
I have been reading the older book, Cabinet Making and Millwork, by John
Feirer. It seemed to get more interesting when he got to the subject of
table saws. Coincidentally, I'm sure, I'm on page 285--"Pushsticks"
(only 600 pages to go...lol).
Cheers,
Bill
Bill wrote:
> Mike Marlow, I bought some Grade 5 (instead of Grade 8) bolts and
> nuts today just so I wouldn't have to wait anymore for them.
Good for ya. You'll be fine with those.
>
> Thinking more about push-sticks and table saws-- What are the chances
> that an errant pushstick will yank one's hand towards the blade? Hmmm...
Not all that great. It's more like where will an errant hand end up?
--
-Mike-
[email protected]
Leon wrote:
> On 12/9/2013 1:21 PM, Bill wrote:
>> Mike Marlow, I bought some Grade 5 (instead of Grade 8) bolts and nuts
>> today just so I wouldn't have to wait anymore for them.
>>
>> This message isn't indexed in precisely the write location, but we're
>> not all writing for posterity.
>>
>>
>> Thinking more about push-sticks and table saws-- What are the chances
>> that an errant pushstick will yank one's hand towards the blade?
>> Hmmm...
>>
>> Maybe should build one of those that look like a plane?
>>
>> I have been reading the older book, Cabinet Making and Millwork, by John
>> Feirer. It seemed to get more interesting when he got to the subject of
>> table saws. Coincidentally, I'm sure, I'm on page 285--"Pushsticks"
>> (only 600 pages to go...lol).
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Bill
>
>
> I strongly recommend, for a home made push device, one that hooks at
> the back of the work and also has a long section that rests on top of
> the work. You really want to also hold the work down in addition to
> pushing. If you need a picture I can provide one.
>
> The push sticks that simply push from the back scare the heck out of me.
I think the 4 or 5 in Feier's book fit that description, as well as the
sketch of one provided in the TS Owners Manual.
I am familar with the shape of the one you are proposing. Since the
Biesemeyer (78-961) splitter I'll be using will prevent me from using
the blade guard,
the push stick I use merits a little more consideration. I can surely
google a template. Thanks for setting me straight on that!
Bill
On 12/9/13, 3:03 PM, Swingman wrote:
> On 12/9/2013 2:21 PM, Bill wrote:
>
>>
>> I am familar with the shape of the one you are proposing.
>
> https://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/QLB8tHZd3FQ3SXSzac07C9MTjNZETYmyPJy0liipFm0?feat=directlink
>
Those are the type I prefer and I make them out of scrap plywood.
Since I use a splitter instead of a guard, mine can be sacrificial
allowing the blade to cut through the heal/cleat.
I either make the sole of the shoe pretty high so a new cleat can be
made from cutting off some of the height of the sole, or I use hardwood
cleats attached and a couple screws at the back.
--
-MIKE-
"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com
[email protected]
---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply
Lew Hodgett wrote:
> "Leon" wrote:
>
>> I strongly recommend, for a home made push device, one that hooks at
>> the back of the work and also has a long section that rests on top
>> of the work. You really want to also hold the work down in addition
>> to pushing. If you need a picture I can provide one.
>>
>> The push sticks that simply push from the back scare the heck out of
>> me.
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> Whack a 2x6x8ft construction timber into 8 equal (12") pieces, then
> either bandsaw a 3/8"x1-1/2"x11" piece away from bottom leaving a 1"
> long
> hook or epoxy a 3/8"x1-1/2"x1" piece to the 2x6 to form a hook.
>
> Repeat on top of 2x6 to make two push sticks from each 2x6.
>
> Lew
>
>
I see. If I understand correctly, then, you like 1 1/2" wide push
sticks. Do you have some 3/4" wide ones too? I only mention that
because it seems to be the common size. A 1.5" wide one sounds a little
safer. Of course, I realize that the work would direct the best choice.
I'm sure boat builders need substantial tools!
[email protected] wrote:
>> Maybe should build one of those that look like a plane?
> I have a couple I like. Both have notches so in addition to pushing I
> can hold the back of the board against the table. Without this, the
> stick can go under the board, causing it to rise. Kick-back is only a
> millisecond of bad luck behind.
Good point!
>
>
> I keep one of the sticks on the fence and the other has a magnet and
> sits stuck to the left side of the table. The idea is that they're
> readily accessible when they're needed.
>
>> I have been reading the older book, Cabinet Making and Millwork, by John
>> Feirer. It seemed to get more interesting when he got to the subject of
>> table saws. Coincidentally, I'm sure, I'm on page 285--"Pushsticks"
>> (only 600 pages to go...lol).
Swingman wrote:
> On 12/9/2013 2:21 PM, Bill wrote:
>
>>
>> I am familar with the shape of the one you are proposing.
>
> https://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/QLB8tHZd3FQ3SXSzac07C9MTjNZETYmyPJy0liipFm0?feat=directlink
And a slight take off on that theme... as well as one that rides my rip
fence. I tend to use the push stick more than the saddle, but the saddle
does have it's place.
http://s1259.photobucket.com/user/mike9369/media/Table%20Saw%20Pictures/20131209_213013_zps097d4c01.jpg.html?sort=3&o=0
--
-Mike-
[email protected]
On 12/9/13, 6:26 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>> Thinking more about push-sticks and table saws-- What are the chances
>> >that an errant pushstick will yank one's hand towards the blade? Hmmm...
> Exceedingly small. The rotation of the blade is towards you, so if
> the stick gets tangled in the blade, it's coming back at you. It
> might put your eye out, but it's unlikely to suck your fingers in. You
> don't reach behind the blade, do you?
>
It's not the stick kicking back that's the danger.
It's your hand moving into the blade once the thing you're pushing
against in gone.
--
-MIKE-
"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com
[email protected]
---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply
Mike Marlow wrote:
> Swingman wrote:
>> On 12/9/2013 2:21 PM, Bill wrote:
>>
>>> I am familar with the shape of the one you are proposing.
>> https://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/QLB8tHZd3FQ3SXSzac07C9MTjNZETYmyPJy0liipFm0?feat=directlink
> And a slight take off on that theme... as well as one that rides my rip
> fence. I tend to use the push stick more than the saddle, but the saddle
> does have it's place.
>
> http://s1259.photobucket.com/user/mike9369/media/Table%20Saw%20Pictures/20131209_213013_zps097d4c01.jpg.html?sort=3&o=0
>
Looks like a good one. Thanks for postingit!
[email protected] wrote:
> On Mon, 09 Dec 2013 22:35:14 -0600, -MIKE- <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> It's your hand moving into the blade once the thing you're pushing
>> against is gone.
> "We're gonna need a bigger stick!"
My thoughts *exactly*!
Yes, I'm grateful to MIKE for refreshing that image in my head. I want
it in my mind before I ever push the ON button.
Bill wrote:
> I was looking at parts diagram for a 2002 Unisaw that I located that
> didn't have a blade guard or splitter.
The saw made the 5 mile ride home without incident, but, to be honest,
it practically fell over twice (never ALL the way over--but beyond
45-degrees) by the time it was in it's mobile base yesterday! : ) Both
of those were "pretty interesting" moments. In the first one I was alone.
Now I'm looking at *blade guards*.
While exploring some of my options, I noticed that ShopNotes featured an
article on building a "Dust-Free Blade Guard"
in 1997 (Volume 16, Issue 92). It seems to be a pretty popular on the
Internet. Is it possible someone has a version of the article that they
might post to abpw?
I am a subscriber to the magazine but I don't save most copies.
Thanks,
Bill
woodchucker wrote:
> On 12/17/2013 11:24 AM, Sonny wrote:
>> On Monday, December 16, 2013 11:14:43 PM UTC-6, Bill wrote:
>>> Bill wrote: > ShopNotes "Dust-Free Blade Guard" in 1997 (Volume 16,
>>> Issue 92).
>>
>>
>> Depending on your download speed, it may take a few minutes to
>> download the whole issue.
>>
>> http://metosexpo.free.fr/extra/wood_ebooks/shopnotes/ShopNotes%20-%20Vol.%2087%20to%2095/ShopNotes%20-%20Vol.%2087%20to%2095/Shopnotes%20%2392%20(Vol%2016)%20-%20Before%20&%20After%20Shop%20Makeover.pdf
>>
>>
>> Sonny
Sonny, Thank you for the download!
>>
>
> Bill,
> I'll see if I can find another article for you. I don't remember what
> mag, but if I still have it, I'll scan and send it.
> Made of plexiglass or lexan which allows you to see in, and includes a
> full 2" vac.. The Shopnotes looks like a crevise tool which I don't
> believe would be as good, I could be wrong.
>
Thanks, I'm still in the idea collection stage. I've got some EMT lying
around...and I'm not afraid to bend it! ; )
woodchucker wrote:
>
> Bill, while not much better than what Sonny had, I like the hood
> better. Not the arm.. I think if you marry Sonny's and this together
> you would likely come out with a nice unit.
> You might even marry some pvc into the support arm (along with the
> pipe for some dust extraction).
>
> See the alt binaries.
>
I agree that the 2" dust collection is most-surely superior to the "trim
attachment. For former design used 3/8" Lexan too (compared to 1/8").
It seems like it would even work better if the vacuum hose is attached
over the rear of the blade.
Barring a ceiling attachment, it seems like 2 separate configurations
are required to avoid most conflicts (one from the left, and one from
the right). Furthermore, it should be fast and easy to alternate
between them.
And it might use EMT since I have 4 or 5 pieces laying on the floor! : )
Imagine a giant C-Clamp with a "blade guard hood" attached to it. Maybe
the C could just be "swung" out of the way? As many say, "The devil is
in the details...".
Bill
On Thu, 19 Dec 2013 17:39:10 -0500, Bill <[email protected]>
wrote:
>Folks act like I'm sitting on my hands. Evidently, I need to learn to
>work Lexan Polycarbonate! It's sort of like wood, except you can see
>through it!
Biggest problem is it melts when cut with high speed implements is
what I experienced. I can set my bandsaw on slow as she goes and avoid
the melting problem.
Of course using the oven and a form to curved a piece could be a start
of some household discord.
You can find scrap Lexan on the net, I have a box of it I bought
sometime ago.
Mark
Markem <[email protected]> wrote in news:1u87b99rrnn1cs42mii2d54af8u9cqf7ba@
4ax.com:
> On Thu, 19 Dec 2013 17:39:10 -0500, Bill <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>>Folks act like I'm sitting on my hands. Evidently, I need to learn to
>>work Lexan Polycarbonate! It's sort of like wood, except you can see
>>through it!
>
> Biggest problem is it melts when cut with high speed implements is
> what I experienced. I can set my bandsaw on slow as she goes and avoid
> the melting problem.
I didn't have a problem with that when I cut Lexan on my table saw a year or so ago. And I've
cut plexiglas (acrylic) on the table saw many times without a melting problem.
Markem wrote:
> On Thu, 19 Dec 2013 17:39:10 -0500, Bill <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> Folks act like I'm sitting on my hands. Evidently, I need to learn to
>> work Lexan Polycarbonate! It's sort of like wood, except you can see
>> through it!
> Biggest problem is it melts when cut with high speed implements is
> what I experienced. I can set my bandsaw on slow as she goes and avoid
> the melting problem.
Hmm.. My 14" BS is not variable speed. But I have a scroll saw and
a jig saw (and the JS may be variable speed).
Did you melt it trying to buff the edges (I've got an 8in bench
grinder that will run at 1725 RPM on slow).
Thank you for making me aware of the "melting" issue.
Bill
>
> Of course using the oven and a form to curved a piece could be a start
> of some household discord.
>
> You can find scrap Lexan on the net, I have a box of it I bought
> sometime ago.
>
> Mark
Doug Miller wrote:
> Markem <[email protected]> wrote in news:1u87b99rrnn1cs42mii2d54af8u9cqf7ba@
> 4ax.com:
>
>> On Thu, 19 Dec 2013 17:39:10 -0500, Bill <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Folks act like I'm sitting on my hands. Evidently, I need to learn to
>>> work Lexan Polycarbonate! It's sort of like wood, except you can see
>>> through it!
>> Biggest problem is it melts when cut with high speed implements is
>> what I experienced. I can set my bandsaw on slow as she goes and avoid
>> the melting problem.
> I didn't have a problem with that when I cut Lexan on my table saw a year or so ago. And I've
> cut plexiglas (acrylic) on the table saw many times without a melting problem.
I exchanged an email with the fellow that made the video and he was very
helpful. He cuts the material with a bandsaw and routes the edges using
a plywood template, on a router table. I will share whatever
presentable results I come up with! : )
Cheers,
Bill
Bill wrote:
> woodchucker wrote:
>>
>> Bill, while not much better than what Sonny had, I like the hood
>> better. Not the arm.. I think if you marry Sonny's and this together
>> you would likely come out with a nice unit.
>> You might even marry some pvc into the support arm (along with the
>> pipe for some dust extraction).
>>
>> See the alt binaries.
>>
> I agree that the 2" dust collection is most-surely superior to the
> "trim attachment. For former design used 3/8" Lexan too (compared to
> 1/8"). It seems like it would even work better if the vacuum hose is
> attached over the rear of the blade.
>
> Barring a ceiling attachment, it seems like 2 separate configurations
> are required to avoid most conflicts (one from the left, and one from
> the right). Furthermore, it should be fast and easy to alternate
> between them.
>
> And it might use EMT since I have 4 or 5 pieces laying on the floor!
> : )
> Imagine a giant C-Clamp with a "blade guard hood" attached to it.
> Maybe the C could just be "swung" out of the way? As many say, "The
> devil is in the details...".
>
> Bill
There is some inspiration to be gleaned from the one of this page of
Grizzly's catalog (bottom of page):
http://www.grizzly.com/catalog/2013/Main/13
<[email protected]> wrote:
> On Thu, 19 Dec 2013 18:40:59 -0600, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet>
> wrote:
>
>> On 12/19/2013 5:55 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>>> On Thu, 19 Dec 2013 16:26:20 -0600, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 12/19/2013 4:22 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>>>>> On Thu, 19 Dec 2013 15:29:19 -0500, "Mike Marlow"
>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> [email protected] wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If you're on the left side of the blade, aren't you tending to pinch
>>>>>>> the board into the blade when you're close to the end of a rip?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> No.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> >On
>>>>>>> the right side of the fence, you're tending to push the side of the
>>>>>>> board that's against the fence rather than the side that's against the
>>>>>>> blade.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I beg to differ. You "tend" to do no such thing. You might do such as a
>>>>>> matter of practice, but that is very different from you "tend" to do. I do
>>>>>> not think there is any such tendency to push left or right no matter which
>>>>>> side you stand on. I know that I am always pushing into the fence.
>>>>>
>>>>> You're pushing the same direction; against the fence. The difference
>>>>> is that the left side of the board is pinching the blade, too.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Actually the left side of the wood only pinches the blade if your fence
>>>> is not parallel to the blade, skewed away from the blade on the back
>>>> side of the blade. Or if you are incorrectly pushing the wood from the
>>>> left side after it has passed the front of the blade.
>>>
>>> Huh? The fence on that SS is on the right side of the blade, no? The
>>> issue isn't the alignment at all.
>>>
>>> The issue I'm talking about is when you get to the end of the board,
>>> which side of the blade are your finners (push stick) on?
>>
>> Right side of the blade.
>>
> ...and you're standing on the left? What about a 2' wide panel?
>>
>> I say it
>>> should be on the right side of the blade so the board is being held
>>> against the blade, rather then the left side so you're holding the
>>> board against the blade.
>>
>> Yes, correct but I can do that by standing on the left side of the blade.
>
> I'm not seeing it with any width of a board.
On a 2' wide panel I stand between the blade and the fence, if using a
fence.
Bill <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:
*snip*
>
> Yes. Definitely. My edges of my blade guard hood won't be clean-
enough
> to sell at Walmart. The only edge that really count on my blade
guard
> hood are the ones that touch the wood. The rest are cosmetic. OTOH, I
> was just reading how a board on a piece of furniture that *looks* like
> it has been worked to be smooth is a sign of higher quality than a
truly
> smooth board.
>
> Cheers,
> Bill
>
Just slap a Duck Dynasty sticker on it. Walmart has tons of the stuff.
Puckdropper
--
Make it to fit, don't make it fit.
Bill <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:
> Bill wrote:
>> Bill wrote:
>>> Bill wrote:
>>>> Next thing you know, someone will suggest that I shouldn't just
>>>> pound in a short length of EMT into my ad-hoc router table! ; )
>>>> That's a JOKE peoples!
>>>>
>>> That doesn't sound nearly as dumb to me now as the first time it
>>> went by. Who says I can't make my own bushing-guide?! Other
>>> suggestions on materials (to hammer into a piece of wood)? I don't
>>> think EMT flexes much...lol I could stick in a few wedges to hold
>>> it in place.
>>>
>>
>
> You may not believe this, but 3 years ago in a different forum some
> people in Washington and other places were having a discussion along
> these very lines! : )
>
Were they as diverse and eloquent as you^h^h^h^h us?
*g*
Puckdropper
--
Make it to fit, don't make it fit.
Doug Miller <[email protected]> wrote:
> Markem
>
>> Biggest problem is it melts when cut with high speed implements is
>> what I experienced. I can set my bandsaw on slow as she goes and avoid
>> the melting problem.
>
> I didn't have a problem with that when I cut Lexan on my table saw a year
> or so ago. And I've
> cut plexiglas (acrylic) on the table saw many times without a melting problem.
Same experience. AAMOF, the company I buy mine from has a Unisaw with a
carbide blade setup in their shop specifically for that purpose. I have
them rough cut the big sheets to make them easier to carry, then cut to
spec on my table saw.
I've also made angled cuts in polycarbonates using the TS-75 with no
problems, and Have also used spiral router bits with good results.
IME, the key component for good results seems to be high quality, carbide
blades; and high quality spiral bits for routing.
--
www.ewoodshop.com (Mobile)
On 12/20/2013 11:41 PM, Bill wrote:
> Mike Marlow wrote:
>> Just go slow and easy and don't try to get it all in one smooth pass -
>> that just won't happen.
>>
> You don't have to worry about that. This is a multifaceted project. 1.
> Blade guard 2. linkage, 3. support.
>
> I have been trying to better understand the "scissors linkage?" which is
> a very common one for connecting a blade guard. Even that has a
> "practical part" (what goes where) and a theoretical part (how well is
> it going to work). I still haven't worked out all of the details, but
> I am rather enjoying collecting them. Alot like a jig-saw puzzle.
>
>
>
>> Good lighting, a constant watchful eye, a careful approach to the
>> work, and you can make this happen. Just be thankful you don't have
>> the issues that Karl has to worry about - payrol, warranty,
>> repeatability, etc. That's the cool part about a hobby over a job.
>
> Yes. Definitely. My edges of my blade guard hood won't be clean-enough
> to sell at Walmart. The only edge that really count on my blade guard
> hood are the ones that touch the wood. The rest are cosmetic. OTOH, I
> was just reading how a board on a piece of furniture that *looks* like
> it has been worked to be smooth is a sign of higher quality than a truly
> smooth board.
>
Really??? What Asshole said that? Remember opinions are like assholes.
LOOKS like is better than one that is??? WTF
> Cheers,
> Bill
--
Jeff
On 12/21/2013 12:44 PM, Bill wrote:
> Actually, to be honest, "Flo" may rank higher on my list of celebrity
> endorsers than the duck...
Now you're talking! ;)
--
eWoodShop: www.eWoodShop.com
Wood Shop: www.e-WoodShop.net
google.com/+KarlCaillouet
http://www.custommade.com/by/ewoodshop/
KarlCaillouet@ (the obvious)
Swingman wrote:
> Doug Miller <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Markem
>>
>>> Biggest problem is it melts when cut with high speed implements is
>>> what I experienced. I can set my bandsaw on slow as she goes and avoid
>>> the melting problem.
>> I didn't have a problem with that when I cut Lexan on my table saw a year
>> or so ago. And I've
>> cut plexiglas (acrylic) on the table saw many times without a melting problem.
> Same experience. AAMOF, the company I buy mine from has a Unisaw with a
> carbide blade setup in their shop specifically for that purpose. I have
> them rough cut the big sheets to make them easier to carry, then cut to
> spec on my table saw.
>
> I've also made angled cuts in polycarbonates using the TS-75 with no
> problems, and Have also used spiral router bits with good results.
>
> IME, the key component for good results seems to be high quality, carbide
> blades; and high quality spiral bits for routing.
>
I don't doubt Swingman for a second. But after looking at $70 router
bits (w/bearing), one become curious what they might accomplish with a
BS and emery cloth. Even with a good router bit, the result would
depend on making a good template. And this is a "One-of"-project. With
the "naive approach", I would double-face tape two pieces together and
cut and sand to the line. Please assess.
Bill wrote:
> I don't doubt Swingman for a second. But after looking at $70 router
> bits (w/bearing), one become curious what they might accomplish with a
> BS and emery cloth. Even with a good router bit, the result would
> depend on making a good template. And this is a "One-of"-project. With
> the "naive approach", I would double-face tape two pieces together and
> cut and sand to the line. Please assess.
Some of these thoughts simply come down to different approaches Bill. Karl
is in business. Time is very important to him. As well - the accuracy of
the finished product. On the other hand - for you it's a hobby... or
becoming a hobby. Therefore, you can afford to take approaches that are
more labor intensive, take longer, and might now yield quite the same
finish.
I fabricate a lot of things out of a lot of different materials (though I've
never worked in lexan), and most times I have no template of any kind to go
by, so I can't use automated processes. It would take me too long to get to
that point to make it worth the while. So - I wing it and hand-dangle it in
the way you are suggesting. With a bit of practice, you can get pretty good
at fabbing this way. At least - for a one off need. Nothing saying you
can't turn out a perfectly acceptable product with your approach. It's just
a different approach.
You'll find yourself discovering unforseen hurdles in what appears to be
simple milling work - but that's what we all go through in either approach.
No big deal. I'd encourage you to go ahead with your double side tape
approach. Hell - when I make my inserts for my table saw, I can only get so
far using the factory insert as a guide, and then I have to do 80% of the
work by bringing it to fit with my belt sander mounted in a vise. Just go
slow and easy and don't try to get it all in one smooth pass - that just
won't happen. Good lighting, a constant watchful eye, a careful approach to
the work, and you can make this happen.
Just be thankful you don't have the issues that Karl has to worry about -
payrol, warranty, repeatability, etc. That's the cool part about a hobby
over a job.
--
-Mike-
[email protected]
Mike Marlow wrote:
> Just go slow and easy and don't try to get it all in one smooth pass -
> that just won't happen.
>
You don't have to worry about that. This is a multifaceted project. 1.
Blade guard 2. linkage, 3. support.
I have been trying to better understand the "scissors linkage?" which is
a very common one for connecting a blade guard. Even that has a
"practical part" (what goes where) and a theoretical part (how well is
it going to work). I still haven't worked out all of the details, but
I am rather enjoying collecting them. Alot like a jig-saw puzzle.
> Good lighting, a constant watchful eye, a careful approach to the
> work, and you can make this happen. Just be thankful you don't have
> the issues that Karl has to worry about - payrol, warranty,
> repeatability, etc. That's the cool part about a hobby over a job.
Yes. Definitely. My edges of my blade guard hood won't be clean-enough
to sell at Walmart. The only edge that really count on my blade guard
hood are the ones that touch the wood. The rest are cosmetic. OTOH, I
was just reading how a board on a piece of furniture that *looks* like
it has been worked to be smooth is a sign of higher quality than a truly
smooth board.
Cheers,
Bill
Puckdropper wrote:
> Bill <[email protected]> wrote in
> news:[email protected]:
>
> *snip*
>
>> Yes. Definitely. My edges of my blade guard hood won't be clean-
> enough
>> to sell at Walmart. The only edge that really count on my blade
> guard
>> hood are the ones that touch the wood. The rest are cosmetic. OTOH, I
>> was just reading how a board on a piece of furniture that *looks* like
>> it has been worked to be smooth is a sign of higher quality than a
> truly
>> smooth board.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Bill
>>
> Just slap a Duck Dynasty sticker on it. Walmart has tons of the stuff.
I haven't seen the show. But I have observed the recent "controversy"
surrounding it. As for me, put an Afflack duck sticker on it, and I'll
buy all you can get! : ) Actually, to be honest, "Flo" may rank
higher on my list of celebrity endorsers than the duck... But lets not
get side-tracked.
-Bill
>
> Puckdropper
woodchucker wrote:
> On 12/20/2013 11:41 PM, Bill wrote:
>> Mike Marlow wrote:
>>> Just go slow and easy and don't try to get it all in one smooth pass -
>>> that just won't happen.
>>>
>> You don't have to worry about that. This is a multifaceted project. 1.
>> Blade guard 2. linkage, 3. support.
>>
>> I have been trying to better understand the "scissors linkage?" which is
>> a very common one for connecting a blade guard. Even that has a
>> "practical part" (what goes where) and a theoretical part (how well is
>> it going to work). I still haven't worked out all of the details, but
>> I am rather enjoying collecting them. Alot like a jig-saw puzzle.
>>
>>
>>
>>> Good lighting, a constant watchful eye, a careful approach to the
>>> work, and you can make this happen. Just be thankful you don't have
>>> the issues that Karl has to worry about - payrol, warranty,
>>> repeatability, etc. That's the cool part about a hobby over a job.
>>
>> Yes. Definitely. My edges of my blade guard hood won't be clean-enough
>> to sell at Walmart. The only edge that really count on my blade guard
>> hood are the ones that touch the wood. The rest are cosmetic. OTOH, I
>> was just reading how a board on a piece of furniture that *looks* like
>> it has been worked to be smooth is a sign of higher quality than a truly
>> smooth board.
>>
> Really??? What Asshole said that? Remember opinions are like assholes.
> LOOKS like is better than one that is??? WTF
Yes, quit planing, sanding, scraping or whatever it is you're doing
before it looks too perfect! ; )
Bill
>
>> Cheers,
>> Bill
>
>
I never claimed to by a physicist or engineer, but I have found myself
trying to think like one in recent days.
By borrowing from numerous sources and integrating a couple ideas of my
own, I drew up a blade guard design and assembly which suits my present
purposes.
It relies however on a short vertical beam being supported ("hung") by a
short supported length of 2by4. The shot vertical beam may consist of a
short length of square steel tubing, a short length of 2by4 material, or
similar.
I would like to be able to MOVE the beam along the length of the 2by4
(for horizontal adjustment). My question is: Is there a familiar
hardware item that will help me with this? All it needs to do is wrap
("hook") around the 2by4 and provide a means to attach what I want. It
seems "definitely related" to a joist hanger, but seems to be something
different. The joist hangers that I have seen do not have "hooks to
wrap around the top of the support" (probably because that would not
evenly distribute the "load" in general).
BTW, I AM striving to be mindful of "torsional" forces.
Bill
Bill wrote:
> I never claimed to by a physicist or engineer, but I have found myself
> trying to think like one in recent days.
>
> By borrowing from numerous sources and integrating a couple ideas of
> my own, I drew up a blade guard design and assembly which suits my
> present purposes.
>
> It relies however on a short vertical beam being supported ("hung") by
> a short supported length of 2by4. The shot vertical beam may consist
> of a short length of square steel tubing, a short length of 2by4
> material, or similar.
>
> I would like to be able to MOVE the beam along the length of the 2by4
> (for horizontal adjustment). My question is: Is there a familiar
> hardware item that will help me with this? All it needs to do is wrap
> ("hook") around the 2by4 and provide a means to attach what I want.
> It seems "definitely related" to a joist hanger, but seems to be
> something different. The joist hangers that I have seen do not have
> "hooks to wrap around the top of the support" (probably because that
> would not evenly distribute the "load" in general).
>
> BTW, I AM striving to be mindful of "torsional" forces.
>
> Bill
It occurred to me that a regular joist hanger slung over the supported
2by4, sort of fits my request--but would not be nearly strong enough
(to have things hanging from, without screws, nails, etc.)
Bill wrote:
> Bill wrote:
>> I never claimed to by a physicist or engineer, but I have found
>> myself trying to think like one in recent days.
>>
>> By borrowing from numerous sources and integrating a couple ideas of
>> my own, I drew up a blade guard design and assembly which suits my
>> present purposes.
>>
>> It relies however on a short vertical beam being supported ("hung")
>> by a short supported length of 2by4. The shot vertical beam may
>> consist of a short length of square steel tubing, a short length of
>> 2by4 material, or similar.
>>
>> I would like to be able to MOVE the beam along the length of the 2by4
>> (for horizontal adjustment). My question is: Is there a familiar
>> hardware item that will help me with this? All it needs to do is
>> wrap ("hook") around the 2by4 and provide a means to attach what I
>> want. It seems "definitely related" to a joist hanger, but seems to
>> be something different. The joist hangers that I have seen do not
>> have "hooks to wrap around the top of the support" (probably because
>> that would not evenly distribute the "load" in general).
>>
>> BTW, I AM striving to be mindful of "torsional" forces.
>>
>> Bill
>
> It occurred to me that a regular joist hanger slung over the supported
> 2by4, sort of fits my request--but would not be nearly strong enough
> (to have things hanging from, without screws, nails, etc.)
It occurred to me where I've seen something akin (not ken) to what I'm
looking for. Around the house, my wife has clothes on hooks which "hang
around the tops of doors". That's precisely in the spirit of what I'm
seeking.
Bill wrote:
> I never claimed to by a physicist or engineer, but I have found myself
> trying to think like one in recent days.
>
> By borrowing from numerous sources and integrating a couple ideas of
> my own, I drew up a blade guard design and assembly which suits my
> present purposes.
>
> It relies however on a short vertical beam being supported ("hung") by
> a short supported length of 2by4. The shot vertical beam may consist
> of a short length of square steel tubing, a short length of 2by4
> material, or similar.
>
> I would like to be able to MOVE the beam along the length of the 2by4
> (for horizontal adjustment). My question is: Is there a familiar
> hardware item that will help me with this? All it needs to do is wrap
> ("hook") around the 2by4 and provide a means to attach what I want.
> It seems "definitely related" to a joist hanger, but seems to be
> something different. The joist hangers that I have seen do not have
> "hooks to wrap around the top of the support" (probably because that
> would not evenly distribute the "load" in general).
>
> BTW, I AM striving to be mindful of "torsional" forces.
>
> Bill
The item in the link below seems needlessly complex, but is pretty close
to what I need. It is upside down in the picture, compared to what I
have in mind. I'm sure I could cobble something together myself: Bend
a piece of sheet steel into a U (with square corners), so it fits over a
2by4. Drill holes through it for a couple of bolts underneath--done.
The holes would go through the "hanging beam". The only problem with
that is it might 'swing'. I need it steady--no pendulum.
http://www.plowhearth.com/product.asp?r=product_listing_ads&pcode=414316&gclid=CKH_7YnWxbsCFbBAMgodJXsASA
Bill wrote:
> The item in the link below seems needlessly complex, but is pretty
> close to what I need. It is upside down in the picture, compared to
> what I have in mind. I'm sure I could cobble something together
> myself: Bend a piece of sheet steel into a U (with square corners),...
As I was laying in bed this morning, it occurred to me again how closely
this "chase" mimics "humans use of tools". Its right up there with
Lew's "Thinking Chair". The activity must create a lot of endorphins
(or something like that) because it seems to perpetuate itself.
Bill
Bill wrote:
> Swingman wrote:
>> Doug Miller <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> Markem
>>>
>>>> Biggest problem is it melts when cut with high speed implements is
>>>> what I experienced. I can set my bandsaw on slow as she goes and avoid
>>>> the melting problem.
>>> I didn't have a problem with that when I cut Lexan on my table saw a
>>> year
>>> or so ago. And I've
>>> cut plexiglas (acrylic) on the table saw many times without a
>>> melting problem.
>> Same experience. AAMOF, the company I buy mine from has a Unisaw with a
>> carbide blade setup in their shop specifically for that purpose. I have
>> them rough cut the big sheets to make them easier to carry, then cut to
>> spec on my table saw.
>>
>> I've also made angled cuts in polycarbonates using the TS-75 with no
>> problems, and Have also used spiral router bits with good results.
>>
>> IME, the key component for good results seems to be high quality,
>> carbide
>> blades; and high quality spiral bits for routing.
> I don't doubt Swingman for a second. But after looking at $70 router
> bits (w/bearing), one become curious what they might accomplish with a
> BS and emery cloth. Even with a good router bit, the result would
> depend on making a good template. And this is a "One-of"-project. With
> the "naive approach", I would double-face tape two pieces together and
> cut and sand to the line. Please assess.
>
I am considering using my router template (bushings?) kit, along with
some double-fluted bits. According to the the folks who make Makrolon,
HSS double or triple fluted bits can be used on the material (of course,
that may indeed yield a lower standard). That raised a thought: It
seems like, given a choice, one would want to use larger diameter bits,
both for stability and to help disiplate any heat--though it would
increase the effective speed (proportionally with diameter). In
contrast, all of the spiral bits I've seen are of small diameter. I
don't argue that smaller bits may be more versatile. I would have
experimented already, but I'm going to have to make a make-shift router
table to accomplish this task.
Bill
Bill wrote:
> I am considering using my router template (bushings?) kit, along with
> some double-fluted bits. According to the the folks who make
> Makrolon, HSS double or triple fluted bits can be used on the material
> (of course, that may indeed yield a lower standard). That raised a
> thought: It seems like, given a choice, one would want to use larger
> diameter bits, both for stability and to help disiplate any
> heat--though it would increase the effective speed (proportionally
> with diameter). In contrast, all of the spiral bits I've seen are of
> small diameter. I don't argue that smaller bits may be more
> versatile. I would have experimented already, but I'm going to have
> to make a make-shift router table to accomplish this task.
>
> Bill
>
>
I was reading at Pat Warner's website, and he indicates that large bits
be avoided for the sake of unnecessary vibration (and resonance).
Bill
Bill wrote:
> Mike Marlow wrote:
>> Just go slow and easy and don't try to get it all in one smooth pass
>> - that just won't happen.
I understand better now what you were saying. In your experience, do you
get better results edge-trimming 1/16" or 1/8" off of plastic? I think
the answer might be 1/8", and the appropriate speed for the router may
be close to 30,000 RPM (rather than much, much, slower), and the work
piece needs to be pushed through much faster than for wood. I need to
build an ad-hoc router table to find out for sure. I take back some of
my earlier sentiments that working plastic and wood were probably very
similar.
How about routing around a steep bend on a router table, against a
template? This seems to be similar for wood or plastic. I suppose one
needs to be careful about the the way the material is held, and a blade
cover around the bit would surely not be bad idea either.
At least I've learned enough that when I read that the base of router is
made out of polycarbonate, it doesn't go completely over my head (i.e.
I've seen the "bullet test" applied to polycarbonate and acrylic,
side-by-side)! I'll check and see it Bill Hylton has anything to say
about some of my questions in his book (WATR).
Bill
Bill wrote:
> Bill wrote:
>> Mike Marlow wrote:
>>> Just go slow and easy and don't try to get it all in one smooth pass
>>> - that just won't happen.
>
> I understand better now what you were saying. In your experience, do
> you get better results edge-trimming 1/16" or 1/8" off of plastic? I
> think the answer might be 1/8", and the appropriate speed for the
> router may be close to 30,000 RPM (rather than much, much, slower),
> and the work piece needs to be pushed through much faster than for
> wood. I need to build an ad-hoc router table to find out for sure. I
> take back some of my earlier sentiments that working plastic and
> wood were probably very similar.
>
> How about routing around a steep bend on a router table, against a
> template? This seems to be similar for wood or plastic. I suppose one
> needs to be careful about the the way the material is held, and a
> blade cover around the bit would surely not be bad idea either.
>
So, I'd recommend starting slow and building up your feel for the task at
hand. I'd start at 1/16th of an inch and take bigger bites as you observe
how it goes, and as you become comfortable routing. You should have no
problem making tight bends around a template. Check out Pat's site for some
good information on this.
--
-Mike-
[email protected]
Mike Marlow wrote:
> Bill wrote:
>> Bill wrote:
>>> Mike Marlow wrote:
>>>> Just go slow and easy and don't try to get it all in one smooth pass
>>>> - that just won't happen.
>> I understand better now what you were saying. In your experience, do
>> you get better results edge-trimming 1/16" or 1/8" off of plastic? I
>> think the answer might be 1/8", and the appropriate speed for the
>> router may be close to 30,000 RPM (rather than much, much, slower),
>> and the work piece needs to be pushed through much faster than for
>> wood. I need to build an ad-hoc router table to find out for sure. I
>> take back some of my earlier sentiments that working plastic and
>> wood were probably very similar.
>>
>> How about routing around a steep bend on a router table, against a
>> template? This seems to be similar for wood or plastic. I suppose one
>> needs to be careful about the the way the material is held, and a
>> blade cover around the bit would surely not be bad idea either.
>>
> So, I'd recommend starting slow and building up your feel for the task at
> hand. I'd start at 1/16th of an inch and take bigger bites as you observe
> how it goes, and as you become comfortable routing. You should have no
> problem making tight bends around a template. Check out Pat's site for some
> good information on this.
>
I ALWAYS find something interesting when I go to his site. But
regarding "machining plastics", that seems to be an area in which he
prefers to give lessons in person.
He is selling his information on templets too (templets is the way he
spells templates). He write that he spells it that way just to bother
people like me (J/K!)
Bill
Mike Marlow wrote:
> So, I'd recommend starting slow and building up your feel for the task
> at hand. I'd start at 1/16th of an inch and take bigger bites as you
> observe how it goes, and as you become comfortable routing. You should
> have no problem making tight bends around a template. Check out Pat's
> site for some good information on this.
I went back to Bill Hylton's book (WWwTR), and read what he had to say
about using templates and guide bushings. BH is one of the great WW-Book
writers! He didn't come right out and say it, but I gained the
impression effective shortening a bushing by pushing it through my
ad-hoc router table may not be "prudent". What he said (paraphrased)
was that you should refrain from cutting them shorter with a hack saw.
That amounts to the same thing... Next thing you know, someone will
suggest that I shouldn't just pound in a short length of EMT into my
ad-hoc router table! ; ) That's a JOKE peoples!
Anyway, I recommend the book WWwTR with much enthusiasm even though it
doesn't delve into cutting Polycarbonate.
I may need to re-examine my strategy. Hmmm.. I have a 17/32" ID/ 5/8"
OD guide-bushing with collar size 1/2". For a 1/4" bit, Hylton
recommend 3/8" ID (an extra 1/8"). This bushing is 5/32" greater than
that. But after going through the table, that may leave me pushing
against 1/4" of "collar"... :( OTOH, with some workarounds, I may be
able to do the cut without the benefit of a router table. It's
"interesting" because the template has to be on top (against the guide
bushing) and the polycarbonate on the bottom. The problem with this is
the workpiece is not supported. I could do it edge by edge off the side
of a table maybe with proper "clamping"....
By the way, BH points out several advantages of guide-bushings over
bearings in general (for instance, they can be used with many of your
router bits). No matter how it works out, I can't say I didn't learn
something. And I tried to spread the joy.
Bill
Bill wrote:
> Next thing you know, someone will suggest that I shouldn't just pound
> in a short length of EMT into my ad-hoc router table! ; ) That's
> a JOKE peoples!
>
That doesn't sound nearly as dumb to me now as the first time it went
by. Who says I can't make my own bushing-guide?! Other suggestions on
materials (to hammer into a piece of wood)? I don't think EMT flexes
much...lol I could stick in a few wedges to hold it in place.
Bill wrote:
> Bill wrote:
>> Next thing you know, someone will suggest that I shouldn't just pound
>> in a short length of EMT into my ad-hoc router table! ; ) That's
>> a JOKE peoples!
>>
> That doesn't sound nearly as dumb to me now as the first time it went
> by. Who says I can't make my own bushing-guide?! Other suggestions
> on materials (to hammer into a piece of wood)? I don't think EMT
> flexes much...lol I could stick in a few wedges to hold it in place.
>
Here's the last idea. How about "extending" a bushing? For instance,
if I piece of EMT fit snugly over one of the bushings I have, that may work.
Bill wrote:
> Bill wrote:
>> Bill wrote:
>>> Next thing you know, someone will suggest that I shouldn't just
>>> pound in a short length of EMT into my ad-hoc router table! ; )
>>> That's a JOKE peoples!
>>>
>> That doesn't sound nearly as dumb to me now as the first time it went
>> by. Who says I can't make my own bushing-guide?! Other suggestions
>> on materials (to hammer into a piece of wood)? I don't think EMT
>> flexes much...lol I could stick in a few wedges to hold it in place.
>>
>
You may not believe this, but 3 years ago in a different forum some
people in Washington and other places were having a discussion along
these very lines! : )
Bill wrote:
> Bill wrote:
>> Next thing you know, someone will suggest that I shouldn't just pound
>> in a short length of EMT into my ad-hoc router table! ; ) That's
>> a JOKE peoples!
>>
> That doesn't sound nearly as dumb to me now as the first time it went
> by. Who says I can't make my own bushing-guide?! Other suggestions
> on materials (to hammer into a piece of wood)? I don't think EMT
> flexes much...lol I could stick in a few wedges to hold it in place.
You're thinking in a good direction Bill. I have not given this idea any
thought - and I probably won't... but your thinking is in the right
direction. Whether it is worth the effort compared to what a set of guide
bushings would cost you at Harbor Freight is another question. But then
again, some times, some things are just fun to do whether they are
economically feasible or not. Whatever you do - if you make your own - just
spend the time to ensure the stability of your "guide". A router is not a
tool that you want to suddenly take off in your hands because your guide
bushing let go.
--
-Mike-
[email protected]
Bill wrote:
> Bill wrote:
>> Bill wrote:
>>> Next thing you know, someone will suggest that I shouldn't just
>>> pound in a short length of EMT into my ad-hoc router table! ; )
>>> That's a JOKE peoples!
>>>
>> That doesn't sound nearly as dumb to me now as the first time it went
>> by. Who says I can't make my own bushing-guide?! Other suggestions
>> on materials (to hammer into a piece of wood)? I don't think EMT
>> flexes much...lol I could stick in a few wedges to hold it in
>> place.
>
> Here's the last idea. How about "extending" a bushing? For instance,
> if I piece of EMT fit snugly over one of the bushings I have, that
> may work.
It may - but just measure the benefit of re-inventing the wheel over simply
going to Harbor Freight.
--
-Mike-
[email protected]
Puckdropper wrote:
> Bill <[email protected]> wrote in
> news:[email protected]:
>
>> Bill wrote:
>>> Bill wrote:
>>>> Bill wrote:
>>>>> Next thing you know, someone will suggest that I shouldn't just
>>>>> pound in a short length of EMT into my ad-hoc router table! ; )
>>>>> That's a JOKE peoples!
>>>>>
>>>> That doesn't sound nearly as dumb to me now as the first time it
>>>> went by. Who says I can't make my own bushing-guide?! Other
>>>> suggestions on materials (to hammer into a piece of wood)? I don't
>>>> think EMT flexes much...lol I could stick in a few wedges to hold
>>>> it in place.
>>>>
>>>
>>
>> You may not believe this, but 3 years ago in a different forum some
>> people in Washington and other places were having a discussion along
>> these very lines! : )
>>
>
> Were they as diverse and eloquent as you^h^h^h^h us?
>
Bill isn't diverse and eloquent - he's just a wood schmuck like the rest of
us.
Don't worry Bill - I've got your back. I won't let these guys talk about
you like that.
--
-Mike-
[email protected]
Mike Marlow wrote:
> Bill wrote:
>> Bill wrote:
>>> Bill wrote:
>>>> Next thing you know, someone will suggest that I shouldn't just
>>>> pound in a short length of EMT into my ad-hoc router table! ; )
>>>> That's a JOKE peoples!
>>>>
>>> That doesn't sound nearly as dumb to me now as the first time it went
>>> by. Who says I can't make my own bushing-guide?! Other suggestions
>>> on materials (to hammer into a piece of wood)? I don't think EMT
>>> flexes much...lol I could stick in a few wedges to hold it in
>>>
> It may - but just measure the benefit of re-inventing the wheel over simply
> going to Harbor Freight.
>
I may not have adequately relayed my circumstances. It's not that I
don't have a set of router guide bushing, as I do. It's that after a
bushing has passed through a router table, from underneath, not so much
of its collar is showing. It may be enough, but more is better (for
safety/performance). The one bushing I mentioned earlier had a collar
that is 1/2" high. After it goes through a router plate (which I don't
have) or just a panel of wood, less is sticking out the other side to
use as a "fence".
It's -5-degrees F. here now at 5:15 pm, and it supposed to get COLD
tonight.
BTW, the fix to my HTML/Text problems (characters running together) with
the SeaMonkey/Thunderbird/Mozilla client seems to be <ctl>+<sht>+y
("Discontinue Text Styles").
Bill
Bill wrote:
> Mike Marlow wrote:
>> Bill wrote:
>>> Bill wrote:
>>>> Bill wrote:
>>>>> Next thing you know, someone will suggest that I shouldn't just
>>>>> pound in a short length of EMT into my ad-hoc router table! ; )
>>>>> That's a JOKE peoples!
>>>>>
>>>> That doesn't sound nearly as dumb to me now as the first time it
>>>> went by. Who says I can't make my own bushing-guide?! Other
>>>> suggestions on materials (to hammer into a piece of wood)? I
>>>> don't think EMT flexes much...lol I could stick in a few wedges
>>>> to hold it in
>> It may - but just measure the benefit of re-inventing the wheel over
>> simply going to Harbor Freight.
>>
>
> I may not have adequately relayed my circumstances. It's not that I
> don't have a set of router guide bushing, as I do. It's that after a
> bushing has passed through a router table, from underneath, not so
> much of its collar is showing. It may be enough, but more is better
> (for safety/performance). The one bushing I mentioned earlier had a
> collar that is 1/2" high. After it goes through a router plate
> (which I don't have) or just a panel of wood, less is sticking out
> the other side to use as a "fence".
>
Hve you looked at Pat's site yet? I think he may address a lot of your
concerns.
> It's -5-degrees F. here now at 5:15 pm, and it supposed to get COLD
> tonight.
>
Wow - if it's going to get cold, then...
> BTW, the fix to my HTML/Text problems (characters running together)
> with the SeaMonkey/Thunderbird/Mozilla client seems to be
> <ctl>+<sht>+y ("Discontinue Text Styles").
>
Does seem to be better.
--
-Mike-
[email protected]
Mike Marlow wrote:
> Puckdropper wrote:
>> Bill <[email protected]> wrote in
>> news:[email protected]:
>>
>>> Bill wrote:
>>>> Bill wrote:
>>>>> Bill wrote:
>>>>>> Next thing you know, someone will suggest that I shouldn't just
>>>>>> pound in a short length of EMT into my ad-hoc router table! ; )
>>>>>> That's a JOKE peoples!
>>>>>>
>>>>> That doesn't sound nearly as dumb to me now as the first time it
>>>>> went by. Who says I can't make my own bushing-guide?! Other
>>>>> suggestions on materials (to hammer into a piece of wood)? I don't
>>>>> think EMT flexes much...lol I could stick in a few wedges to hold
>>>>> it in place.
>>>>>
>>> You may not believe this, but 3 years ago in a different forum some
>>> people in Washington and other places were having a discussion along
>>> these very lines! : )
>>>
>> Were they as diverse and eloquent as you^h^h^h^h us?
>>
> Bill isn't diverse and eloquent - he's just a wood schmuck like the rest of
> us.
If you look up the origins of that "muck" word, it may provide fresh
insight into another famous word.
Regarding eloquence, my goal is to write ever clearer and clearer, until
Roy Underhill recognizes me and has me on his show! : )
I'll tote one of the original polycarbonate blade guards I have
collected, crude but over 100 years old! ; )
Bill
>
> Don't worry Bill - I've got your back. I won't let these guys talk about
> you like that.
>
On 1/1/2014 3:03 AM, Bill wrote:
> Bill wrote:
>> I am considering using my router template (bushings?) kit, along with
>> some double-fluted bits. According to the the folks who make
>> Makrolon, HSS double or triple fluted bits can be used on the material
>> (of course, that may indeed yield a lower standard). That raised a
>> thought: It seems like, given a choice, one would want to use larger
>> diameter bits, both for stability and to help disiplate any
>> heat--though it would increase the effective speed (proportionally
>> with diameter). In contrast, all of the spiral bits I've seen are of
>> small diameter. I don't argue that smaller bits may be more
>> versatile. I would have experimented already, but I'm going to have
>> to make a make-shift router table to accomplish this task.
>>
>> Bill
>>
>>
> I was reading at Pat Warner's website, and he indicates that large bits
> be avoided for the sake of unnecessary vibration (and resonance).
>
> Bill
Well, Pat's a smart guy with a lot of good stuff, but if you need a
profile, I would not hesitate to use a large bit.
After a certain size though, it pays to use a shaper, or profile in
small sizes and join if possible. Most of the time it's not hence the
need for large bits.
Also you can go to vertical bits, but they scallop more.
--
Jeff
woodchucker wrote:
>
> Consider large EMT so that it does the dust collection. Not your EMT
> that you used to wire the place. That would work for just supporting
> it, but consider putting the dust collection through the support just
> the way a store bought unit works. Attach an elbow and you are good to
> go.
>
Keep that positive attitiude! I need to read the stuff the was uploaded
for me today to build my confidence back up! I felt confident for a
while, then I slipped. Time to sleep on it.
Cheers,
Bill
Doug Miller wrote:
> Bill <[email protected]> wrote in news:[email protected]:
>
>> There is some inspiration to be gleaned from the one of this page of
>> Grizzly's catalog (bottom of page):
>> http://www.grizzly.com/catalog/2013/Main/13
> Dust hose attaches in the wrong place. To do any good at all, the dust hose needs to attach at
> the *front* of the blade guard, not the rear.
>
That makes sense now. How could they have got that wrong (just
rhetorical question)?
Thanks Doug.
Bill
On Tue, 17 Dec 2013 19:41:40 -0500, Bill wrote:
> Imagine a giant C-Clamp with a "blade guard hood" attached to it. Maybe
> the C could just be "swung" out of the way? As many say, "The devil is
> in the details...".
Sounds like the overhead guard on my 1948 Delta - but alas, no dust
collection. It does have a dust chute coming out the back but it's
square :-). Take a look at:
http://vintagemachinery.org/photoindex/detail.aspx?id=3666
--
This message was for rec.woodworking - if it appears in homeownershub
they ripped it off.
Larry Blanchard wrote:
> On Tue, 17 Dec 2013 19:41:40 -0500, Bill wrote:
>
>> Imagine a giant C-Clamp with a "blade guard hood" attached to it. Maybe
>> the C could just be "swung" out of the way? As many say, "The devil is
>> in the details...".
> Sounds like the overhead guard on my 1948 Delta - but alas, no dust
> collection. It does have a dust chute coming out the back but it's
> square :-). Take a look at:
>
> http://vintagemachinery.org/photoindex/detail.aspx?id=3666
>
Now, I really appreciate the engineering that went into that! : )
Thanks!
Bill
Woodchucker wrote:
> I think if you marry Sonny's and this together you would likely come
out with a nice unit.
> You might even marry some pvc into the support arm (along with the
pipe for some dust extraction).
Jeff, I think your idea of using PVC for a dust collecting support arm
has a lot of merit.
One could pick up a few ideas from the support arm of this unit:
http://www.pennstateind.com/library/TSGUARD_ins.pdf
I can imagine getting a support structure in order using a half-a-roll
of duck tape? But maybe that is cheating. ; )
Bill
Larry Blanchard wrote:
> On Tue, 17 Dec 2013 19:41:40 -0500, Bill wrote:
>
>> Imagine a giant C-Clamp with a "blade guard hood" attached to it. Maybe
>> the C could just be "swung" out of the way? As many say, "The devil is
>> in the details...".
> Sounds like the overhead guard on my 1948 Delta - but alas, no dust
> collection. It does have a dust chute coming out the back but it's
> square :-). Take a look at:
>
> http://vintagemachinery.org/photoindex/detail.aspx?id=3666
>
Larry, Thanks for proving I wasn't completely-delusional. After posting
about a "C-clamp" in the first place, I was concerned folks wouldn't
have a clue about what I was talking about (and I could not have blamed
them!)
Bill
Doug Miller wrote:
> Bill <[email protected]> wrote in news:[email protected]:
>
>> Woodchucker wrote:
>>
>>> I think if you marry Sonny's and this together you would likely come
>> out with a nice unit.
>>> You might even marry some pvc into the support arm (along with the
>> pipe for some dust extraction).
>>
>> Jeff, I think your idea of using PVC for a dust collecting support arm
>> has a lot of merit.
> Some merit, anyway. I tried that about a year ago; even 2" PVC is disappointingly flexible
> over a span of 4+ feet, and requires overhead support.
Well, that is useful to know. I'm becoming sorry I didn't keep the
base from an old halogen lamp. I've got a similar one right next to me,
and it's base seems to be 20 pounds at least. Attaching a 3-foot length
of PVC to that, I might have a structure for a blade guard in short
order. If anyone is worried about safety, please don't, it's too early
for that. I'm just thinking out loud (sort-of).
I have the original equipment blade guard with splitter. But I upgraded
the splitter to a riving knife (and that's how I got to this point).
Bill
>
>> One could pick up a few ideas from the support arm of this unit:
>>
>> http://www.pennstateind.com/library/TSGUARD_ins.pdf
> That's what I modeled mine after (except I put the dust port in front where it belongs). I used
> PVC mostly for proof-of-concept, and will probably re-do it some day using EMT or RMC.
Leon wrote:
> On 12/18/2013 10:48 AM, Bill wrote:
>> Doug Miller wrote:
>>> Bill <[email protected]> wrote in
>>> news:[email protected]:
>>>
>>>> There is some inspiration to be gleaned from the one of this page of
>>>> Grizzly's catalog (bottom of page):
>>>> http://www.grizzly.com/catalog/2013/Main/13
>>> Dust hose attaches in the wrong place. To do any good at all, the dust
>>> hose needs to attach at
>>> the *front* of the blade guard, not the rear.
>>>
>>
>> That makes sense now. How could they have got that wrong (just
>> rhetorical question)?
>> Thanks Doug.
>>
>> Bill
>
> Well It may not be wrong, SawStop claims extreme efficiency with their
> guard and the hose is at the rear. It all depends on the turbulence
> and flow inside the guard.
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IJEi_lWGeLs
Someone posted in the comments section of that video, that the person in
the video is "standing on the wrong side of the fence". What do you think?
>
> I have the SawStop but don't use the guard at all, If I was worried
> about the little bit that comes out on top of the table I would
> probably use the guard but IMHO it is not enough to worry about since
> you are not going to get all of it anyway.
>
> But having said all of that, the vast majority of the saw dust goes
> down inside the saw. Your sander, if used with out a vacuum, might
> produce more dust than the top side of the saw with out guard dust
> collection.
>
> Just saying, it might be a lot of trouble to try to catch 10% of the
> dust on top.
On 12/28/2013 7:18 PM, Larry Blanchard wrote:
> On Sat, 28 Dec 2013 15:55:44 -0500, woodchucker wrote:
>
>>> Bill, that's a lot of extra work to get larger text. In Tbird, just
>>> click on "format", then "size", and pick large, x-large, or xx-large.
>>>
>> Larry, where in newsgroup reader do you have format? I don't it's a
>> text version only so no formatting in Tbird
>
> In my version of Tbird (17.0.2) if I click "write" and put the cursor in
> the message body, "insert" and "format" will appear at the top of the
> screen.
>
> I don't use Tbird for newsgroups, only for email, but I assume you still
> click "write" to respond to a post. I could be wrong.
>
Well they are different for mail vs newsgroups.
The options are very different.
BTW Tbird is upto 24.10 and maybe higher since it has wanted to upgrade
me for 2 weeks, and I am holding off right now.
So you are on a very old version.
--
Jeff
"Bill" wrote:
>>> 1. Edit in HTML-Mode in Thunderbird (so that I can view large
>>> text). In
>>> text-mode I don't believe I can make it large enough.
>>> 2. Copy my reply into Wordpad and Paste it into the Thunderbird
>>> editor
>>> 3. Post as text file.
>>>
>>> When I do this, as you've noticed, it does not leave blank lines
>>> ahead
>>> of my text. I added a couple of blank lines in both places this
>>> time,
>>> both in the text file and in the html file ahead of where I did
>>> the
>>> paste. Let's see how it comes out. Bear with me, this must be
>>> fixable.
>>> Sorry for your inconvenience!
>>>
>
> I've been playing around with the configurations for a few minutes.
> BTW, I use the SeaMonkey email/newsgroup client (which is akin to
> Thunderbird)--not actually Thunderbird, but still "Mozilla", I
> think.
>
> I guess it is the "colored background" feature that I missed (more
> than size). I have a "particularly brilliant" monitor, and a colored
> background helps alot. Looking at a 23" white background tires the
> eyes...
-------------------------------------------------------------
What price paranoia.
If Thunderbird duplicates O-E6, then open up a trash identity that
only reads
usenet.
Problem solved.
At least it was for me running XP.
Lew
On 12/28/2013 12:53 PM, Larry Blanchard wrote:
> On Sat, 28 Dec 2013 02:18:02 -0500, Bill wrote:
>
>> 1. Edit in HTML-Mode in Thunderbird (so that I can view large text). In
>> text-mode I don't believe I can make it large enough. 2. Copy my reply
>> into Wordpad and Paste it into the Thunderbird editor 3. Post as text
>> file.
>
> Bill, that's a lot of extra work to get larger text. In Tbird, just
> click on "format", then "size", and pick large, x-large, or xx-large.
>
Larry, where in newsgroup reader do you have format? I don't it's a
text version only so no formatting in Tbird
--
Jeff
On 12/27/2013 7:52 PM, Bill wrote:
> Doug Miller wrote:
>> Bill <[email protected]> wrote in
>> news:[email protected]:
>>
>>> I tried to pick up some Lexan at a Borg today, but did not score (that's
>>> a little glass humor...).
>> As far as I know, the only places in Indy where you can buy
>> polycarbonate plastic (Lexan) are:
>> -- Meyer Plastics on E. 65th St., 1/2 mi west of Binford Blvd
>> -- Auburn Plastics on Shadeland Ave, 1/4 mi north of I-70
>>
>> Thank you for the suggestion Doug. Meyer Plastics only sells full
>> (4'x8') sheets, besides their custom work--which I think is their
>> bread and butter. But there was 4 square feet of 1/4" "Bayer"
>> Makrolon (polycarbonate),ISO-9000:2001, (made by Sheffield Plastics)
>> in their cut-off bin and they sold it to me at an excellent price.
>> I'm not sure of the properties of the stuff, but I have little doubt
>> that it even more adequate than the 1/8" Makrolon GP (general
>> purpose?) that I went there after. So now, I feel like I have a fine
>> a piece of exotic material, but thicker than I expected to get, and I
>> will have to further consider how I am going to work it (where is a
>> router table when you need one?) But at least now I know (or think)
>> God is behind me on this one!
>>
>> Fortunately, I was introduced to sanding polycarbonate (I think) when
>> I was about 11 years old in the Boy Clubs of America (now the Boys &
>> Girls Clubs of America).
>>
>> I doubt I would have found the facility before it closed without help
>> from my Garmin GPS device (highly recommended to those who haven't
>> tried one).
>> Excuse me for writing so much this week--my wife will be returning
>> tomorrow!
>>
>> Bill
Not sure of the price you paid, but 1/4" will be very useful.
Consider that it would be great for many projects.
Now if you are using this for the blade guard, consider making the arms
long, so that you can counterbalance the weight of the guard if the
guard comes out heavy. The counter weight would make guard lighter. This
is not hard to re-engineer Bill, everything we do in life we must adjust
to the situation.
--
Jeff
Bill <[email protected]> wrote in news:[email protected]:
> I tried to pick up some Lexan at a Borg today, but did not score (that's
> a little glass humor...).
As far as I know, the only places in Indy where you can buy polycarbonate plastic (Lexan) are:
-- Meyer Plastics on E. 65th St., 1/2 mi west of Binford Blvd
-- Auburn Plastics on Shadeland Ave, 1/4 mi north of I-70
Meyer will let you pick through their scrap bin, and not charge you for whatever you find there.
On 12/27/2013 8:46 PM, Bill wrote:
> woodchucker wrote:
>> On 12/27/2013 7:52 PM, Bill wrote:
>>> Doug Miller wrote:
>>>> Bill <[email protected]> wrote in
>>>> news:[email protected]:
>>>>
>>>>> I tried to pick up some Lexan at a Borg today, but did not score
>>>>> (that's
>>>>> a little glass humor...).
>>>> As far as I know, the only places in Indy where you can buy
>>>> polycarbonate plastic (Lexan) are:
>>>> -- Meyer Plastics on E. 65th St., 1/2 mi west of Binford Blvd
>>>> -- Auburn Plastics on Shadeland Ave, 1/4 mi north of I-70
>>>>
>>>> Thank you for the suggestion Doug. Meyer Plastics only sells full
>>>> (4'x8') sheets, besides their custom work--which I think is their
>>>> bread and butter. But there was 4 square feet of 1/4" "Bayer"
>>>> Makrolon (polycarbonate),ISO-9000:2001, (made by Sheffield Plastics)
>>>> in their cut-off bin and they sold it to me at an excellent price.
>>>> I'm not sure of the properties of the stuff, but I have little doubt
>>>> that it even more adequate than the 1/8" Makrolon GP (general
>>>> purpose?) that I went there after. So now, I feel like I have a fine
>>>> a piece of exotic material, but thicker than I expected to get, and I
>>>> will have to further consider how I am going to work it (where is a
>>>> router table when you need one?) But at least now I know (or think)
>>>> God is behind me on this one!
>>>>
>>>> Fortunately, I was introduced to sanding polycarbonate (I think) when
>>>> I was about 11 years old in the Boy Clubs of America (now the Boys &
>>>> Girls Clubs of America).
>>>>
>>>> I doubt I would have found the facility before it closed without help
>>>> from my Garmin GPS device (highly recommended to those who haven't
>>>> tried one).
>>>> Excuse me for writing so much this week--my wife will be returning
>>>> tomorrow!
>>>>
>>>> Bill
>>
>> Not sure of the price you paid, but 1/4" will be very useful.
>> Consider that it would be great for many projects.
>> Now if you are using this for the blade guard, consider making the
>> arms long, so that you can counterbalance the weight of the guard if
>> the guard comes out heavy. The counter weight would make guard
>> lighter. This is not hard to re-engineer Bill, everything we do in
>> life we must adjust to the situation.
>>
> Thanks Jeff. Here is a link to a video showing the *actual guard* I
> want to make. The linkage and support are separate projects. Notice
> that the top of the guard never moves (while sawing).
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cxZOO_zcpNM
>
> Bill
>
>
Ok, that won't require a counter balance.
--
Jeff
On 12/28/2013 2:18 AM, Bill wrote:
> Mike Marlow wrote:
>> Do you put a new line in between the previous poster's comments and
>> the comments you are adding? Maybe it's your reader or maybe you're
>> not putting a new line in before you begin your comments(?). Just
>> thought I'd let you know...
>
>
>
>
> I am aware of the problem Mike. I'm not sure what to do about it (but
> I'll try a little harder).
>
> Whenever I post, I:
>
> 1. Edit in HTML-Mode in Thunderbird (so that I can view large text). In
> text-mode I don't believe I can make it large enough.
> 2. Copy my reply into Wordpad and Paste it into the Thunderbird editor
> 3. Post as text file.
>
> When I do this, as you've noticed, it does not leave blank lines ahead
> of my text. I added a couple of blank lines in both places this time,
> both in the text file and in the html file ahead of where I did the
> paste. Let's see how it comes out. Bear with me, this must be fixable.
> Sorry for your inconvenience!
>
> Bill
Bill I use thunderbird too, just hit control plus in text mode it makes
the text larger.
--
Jeff
On Fri, 20 Dec 2013 12:30:46 -0500, Bill <[email protected]>
wrote:
>Swingman wrote:
>> Doug Miller <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> Markem
>>>
>>>> Biggest problem is it melts when cut with high speed implements is
>>>> what I experienced. I can set my bandsaw on slow as she goes and avoid
>>>> the melting problem.
>>> I didn't have a problem with that when I cut Lexan on my table saw a year
>>> or so ago. And I've
>>> cut plexiglas (acrylic) on the table saw many times without a melting problem.
>> Same experience. AAMOF, the company I buy mine from has a Unisaw with a
>> carbide blade setup in their shop specifically for that purpose. I have
>> them rough cut the big sheets to make them easier to carry, then cut to
>> spec on my table saw.
>>
>> I've also made angled cuts in polycarbonates using the TS-75 with no
>> problems, and Have also used spiral router bits with good results.
>>
>> IME, the key component for good results seems to be high quality, carbide
>> blades; and high quality spiral bits for routing.
>>
>I don't doubt Swingman for a second. But after looking at $70 router
>bits (w/bearing), one become curious what they might accomplish with a
>BS and emery cloth. Even with a good router bit, the result would
>depend on making a good template. And this is a "One-of"-project. With
>the "naive approach", I would double-face tape two pieces together and
>cut and sand to the line. Please assess.
Sounds like a great plan to me Bill.
Mark
On 12/28/2013 10:40 PM, Mike Marlow wrote:
> Bill wrote:
>
>> If I post a formatted message, without first passing it through a text
>> editor (to clean it up), I think it would post with a lot of small
>> errors. Not sure how you can "format" a text file.
>
> Not sure what you are trying to say here Bill. What exactly, is the problem
> you are trying to solve? At a point one has to look at the fact that the
> vast majority of the people posting to usenet do not have to worry about
> these things, and question one's own thoughts. In other words - I think you
> may be imagining boogymen that just don't exist. Why not just use a
> newsreader and simply post like the rest of us do?
>
Well, he's got a monkey on his back ;-)
--
Jeff
Markem wrote:
> On Fri, 20 Dec 2013 12:30:46 -0500, Bill <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> Swingman wrote:
>>> Doug Miller <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> Markem
>>>>
>>>>> Biggest problem is it melts when cut with high speed implements is
>>>>> what I experienced. I can set my bandsaw on slow as she goes and avoid
>>>>> the melting problem.
>>>> I didn't have a problem with that when I cut Lexan on my table saw a year
>>>> or so ago. And I've
>>>> cut plexiglas (acrylic) on the table saw many times without a melting problem.
>>> Same experience. AAMOF, the company I buy mine from has a Unisaw with a
>>> carbide blade setup in their shop specifically for that purpose. I have
>>> them rough cut the big sheets to make them easier to carry, then cut to
>>> spec on my table saw.
>>>
>>> I've also made angled cuts in polycarbonates using the TS-75 with no
>>> problems, and Have also used spiral router bits with good results.
>>>
>>> IME, the key component for good results seems to be high quality, carbide
>>> blades; and high quality spiral bits for routing.
>>>
>> I don't doubt Swingman for a second. But after looking at $70 router
>> bits (w/bearing), one become curious what they might accomplish with a
>> BS and emery cloth. Even with a good router bit, the result would
>> depend on making a good template. And this is a "One-of"-project. With
>> the "naive approach", I would double-face tape two pieces together and
>> cut and sand to the line. Please assess.
> Sounds like a great plan to me Bill.
>
> Mark
Thanks Mark! That's all I needed. Just *one* person to blame if it
doesn't work (J/K!).
In retrospect, lots of times the simple ways are the appropriate ones,
and I think this is one of those times.
I tried to pick up some Lexan at a Borg today, but did not score (that's
a little glass humor...).
Bill
Doug Miller wrote:
> Bill <[email protected]> wrote in news:[email protected]:
>
>> I tried to pick up some Lexan at a Borg today, but did not score (that's
>> a little glass humor...).
> As far as I know, the only places in Indy where you can buy polycarbonate plastic (Lexan) are:
> -- Meyer Plastics on E. 65th St., 1/2 mi west of Binford Blvd
> -- Auburn Plastics on Shadeland Ave, 1/4 mi north of I-70
>
> Thank you for the suggestion Doug. Meyer Plastics only sells full (4'x8') sheets, besides their custom work--which I think is their bread and butter. But there was 4 square feet of 1/4" "Bayer" Makrolon (polycarbonate),ISO-9000:2001, (made by Sheffield Plastics) in their cut-off bin and they sold it to me at an excellent price. I'm not sure of the properties of the stuff, but I have little doubt that it even more adequate than the 1/8" Makrolon GP (general purpose?) that I went there after. So now, I feel like I have a fine a piece of exotic material, but thicker than I expected to get, and I will have to further consider how I am going to work it (where is a router table when you need one?) But at least now I know (or think) God is behind me on this one!
>
> Fortunately, I was introduced to sanding polycarbonate (I think) when I was about 11 years old in the Boy Clubs of America (now the Boys & Girls Clubs of America).
>
> I doubt I would have found the facility before it closed without help from my Garmin GPS device (highly recommended to those who haven't tried one).
> Excuse me for writing so much this week--my wife will be returning tomorrow!
>
> Bill
>
woodchucker wrote:
> On 12/27/2013 7:52 PM, Bill wrote:
>> Doug Miller wrote:
>>> Bill <[email protected]> wrote in
>>> news:[email protected]:
>>>
>>>> I tried to pick up some Lexan at a Borg today, but did not score
>>>> (that's
>>>> a little glass humor...).
>>> As far as I know, the only places in Indy where you can buy
>>> polycarbonate plastic (Lexan) are:
>>> -- Meyer Plastics on E. 65th St., 1/2 mi west of Binford Blvd
>>> -- Auburn Plastics on Shadeland Ave, 1/4 mi north of I-70
>>>
>>> Thank you for the suggestion Doug. Meyer Plastics only sells full
>>> (4'x8') sheets, besides their custom work--which I think is their
>>> bread and butter. But there was 4 square feet of 1/4" "Bayer"
>>> Makrolon (polycarbonate),ISO-9000:2001, (made by Sheffield Plastics)
>>> in their cut-off bin and they sold it to me at an excellent price.
>>> I'm not sure of the properties of the stuff, but I have little doubt
>>> that it even more adequate than the 1/8" Makrolon GP (general
>>> purpose?) that I went there after. So now, I feel like I have a fine
>>> a piece of exotic material, but thicker than I expected to get, and I
>>> will have to further consider how I am going to work it (where is a
>>> router table when you need one?) But at least now I know (or think)
>>> God is behind me on this one!
>>>
>>> Fortunately, I was introduced to sanding polycarbonate (I think) when
>>> I was about 11 years old in the Boy Clubs of America (now the Boys &
>>> Girls Clubs of America).
>>>
>>> I doubt I would have found the facility before it closed without help
>>> from my Garmin GPS device (highly recommended to those who haven't
>>> tried one).
>>> Excuse me for writing so much this week--my wife will be returning
>>> tomorrow!
>>>
>>> Bill
>
> Not sure of the price you paid, but 1/4" will be very useful.
> Consider that it would be great for many projects.
> Now if you are using this for the blade guard, consider making the
> arms long, so that you can counterbalance the weight of the guard if
> the guard comes out heavy. The counter weight would make guard
> lighter. This is not hard to re-engineer Bill, everything we do in
> life we must adjust to the situation.
>
Thanks Jeff. Here is a link to a video showing the *actual guard* I
want to make. The linkage and support are separate projects. Notice
that the top of the guard never moves (while sawing).
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cxZOO_zcpNM
Bill
Bill wrote:
> woodchucker wrote:
>> On 12/27/2013 7:52 PM, Bill wrote:
>>> Doug Miller wrote:
>>>> Bill <[email protected]> wrote in
>>>> news:[email protected]:
>>>>
>>>>> I tried to pick up some Lexan at a Borg today, but did not score
>>>>> (that's
>>>>> a little glass humor...).
>>>> As far as I know, the only places in Indy where you can buy
>>>> polycarbonate plastic (Lexan) are:
>>>> -- Meyer Plastics on E. 65th St., 1/2 mi west of Binford Blvd
>>>> -- Auburn Plastics on Shadeland Ave, 1/4 mi north of I-70
>>>>
>>>> Thank you for the suggestion Doug. Meyer Plastics only sells full
>>>> (4'x8') sheets, besides their custom work--which I think is their
>>>> bread and butter. But there was 4 square feet of 1/4" "Bayer"
>>>> Makrolon (polycarbonate),ISO-9000:2001, (made by Sheffield
>>>> Plastics) in their cut-off bin and they sold it to me at an
>>>> excellent price. I'm not sure of the properties of the stuff, but
>>>> I have little doubt that it even more adequate than the 1/8"
>>>> Makrolon GP (general purpose?) that I went there after. So now, I
>>>> feel like I have a fine a piece of exotic material, but thicker
>>>> than I expected to get, and I will have to further consider how I
>>>> am going to work it (where is a router table when you need one?) But at
>>>> least now I know (or think) God is behind me on this one!
>>>>
>>>> Fortunately, I was introduced to sanding polycarbonate (I think)
>>>> when I was about 11 years old in the Boy Clubs of America (now the
>>>> Boys & Girls Clubs of America).
>>>>
>>>> I doubt I would have found the facility before it closed without
>>>> help from my Garmin GPS device (highly recommended to those who
>>>> haven't tried one).
>>>> Excuse me for writing so much this week--my wife will be returning
>>>> tomorrow!
>>>>
>>>> Bill
>>
>> Not sure of the price you paid, but 1/4" will be very useful.
>> Consider that it would be great for many projects.
>> Now if you are using this for the blade guard, consider making the
>> arms long, so that you can counterbalance the weight of the guard if
>> the guard comes out heavy. The counter weight would make guard
>> lighter. This is not hard to re-engineer Bill, everything we do in
>> life we must adjust to the situation.
>>
> Thanks Jeff. Here is a link to a video showing the *actual guard* I
> want to make. The linkage and support are separate projects. Notice
> that the top of the guard never moves (while sawing).
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cxZOO_zcpNM
>
> Bill
Hey Bill - I don't know if this happens for everyone, but at least in my
reader, your replies to people are run on with their original comments,
which makes it difficult to sort out and find what you are saying without
re-reading everything. I left the above text intact so you could see how it
looks in my reader. Often times the > gets kinda lost in the run together
text which makes sorting out your comments difficult. My reader has put the
various > insertions in so your comments appear easier to see above, but
when your posts arrive your comments don't have that so it's hard to sort
out your text.
Do you put a new line in between the previous poster's comments and the
comments you are adding? Maybe it's your reader or maybe you're not putting
a new line in before you begin your comments(?).
Just thought I'd let you know...
--
-Mike-
[email protected]
Mike Marlow wrote:
> Do you put a new line in between the previous poster's comments and
> the comments you are adding? Maybe it's your reader or maybe you're
> not putting a new line in before you begin your comments(?). Just
> thought I'd let you know...
I am aware of the problem Mike. I'm not sure what to do about it (but
I'll try a little harder).
Whenever I post, I:
1. Edit in HTML-Mode in Thunderbird (so that I can view large text). In
text-mode I don't believe I can make it large enough.
2. Copy my reply into Wordpad and Paste it into the Thunderbird editor
3. Post as text file.
When I do this, as you've noticed, it does not leave blank lines ahead
of my text. I added a couple of blank lines in both places this time,
both in the text file and in the html file ahead of where I did the
paste. Let's see how it comes out. Bear with me, this must be fixable.
Sorry for your inconvenience!
Bill
Bill wrote:
> Mike Marlow wrote:
>> Do you put a new line in between the previous poster's comments and
>> the comments you are adding? Maybe it's your reader or maybe you're
>> not putting a new line in before you begin your comments(?). Just
>> thought I'd let you know...
>
>
>
>
> I am aware of the problem Mike. I'm not sure what to do about it (but
> I'll try a little harder).
>
> Whenever I post, I:
>
> 1. Edit in HTML-Mode in Thunderbird (so that I can view large text).
> In text-mode I don't believe I can make it large enough.
> 2. Copy my reply into Wordpad and Paste it into the Thunderbird editor
> 3. Post as text file.
>
> When I do this, as you've noticed, it does not leave blank lines ahead
> of my text. I added a couple of blank lines in both places this time,
> both in the text file and in the html file ahead of where I did the
> paste. Let's see how it comes out. Bear with me, this must be
> fixable. Sorry for your inconvenience!
>
> Bill
It seemed to have worked that time. This time I am typing directly into
Thunderbird's html editor, and I have left 2 blank lines above. I bet
they get dropped. Let's see.
Bill wrote:
> Mike Marlow wrote:
>> Do you put a new line in between the previous poster's comments and
>> the comments you are adding? Maybe it's your reader or maybe you're
>> not putting a new line in before you begin your comments(?). Just
>> thought I'd let you know...
>
>
>
>
> I am aware of the problem Mike. I'm not sure what to do about it (but
> I'll try a little harder).
>
> Whenever I post, I:
>
> 1. Edit in HTML-Mode in Thunderbird (so that I can view large text). In
> text-mode I don't believe I can make it large enough.
> 2. Copy my reply into Wordpad and Paste it into the Thunderbird editor
> 3. Post as text file.
>
> When I do this, as you've noticed, it does not leave blank lines ahead
> of my text. I added a couple of blank lines in both places this time,
> both in the text file and in the html file ahead of where I did the
> paste. Let's see how it comes out. Bear with me, this must be
> fixable. Sorry for your inconvenience!
>
Man - that's a lot of work to post some thoughts Bill. Your reply did come
through with the added new lines inserted this time.
--
-Mike-
[email protected]
Bill wrote:
> Bill wrote:
>> Mike Marlow wrote:
>>> Do you put a new line in between the previous poster's comments and
>>> the comments you are adding? Maybe it's your reader or maybe you're
>>> not putting a new line in before you begin your comments(?). Just
>>> thought I'd let you know...
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> I am aware of the problem Mike. I'm not sure what to do about it
>> (but I'll try a little harder).
>>
>> Whenever I post, I:
>>
>> 1. Edit in HTML-Mode in Thunderbird (so that I can view large text).
>> In text-mode I don't believe I can make it large enough.
>> 2. Copy my reply into Wordpad and Paste it into the Thunderbird
>> editor 3. Post as text file.
>>
>> When I do this, as you've noticed, it does not leave blank lines
>> ahead of my text. I added a couple of blank lines in both places
>> this time, both in the text file and in the html file ahead of where
>> I did the paste. Let's see how it comes out. Bear with me, this
>> must be fixable. Sorry for your inconvenience!
>>
>> Bill
>
>
> It seemed to have worked that time. This time I am typing directly
> into Thunderbird's html editor, and I have left 2 blank lines above. I bet
> they get dropped. Let's see.
Nope - they seem to have come through.
--
-Mike-
[email protected]
On Sat, 28 Dec 2013 02:18:02 -0500, Bill wrote:
> 1. Edit in HTML-Mode in Thunderbird (so that I can view large text). In
> text-mode I don't believe I can make it large enough. 2. Copy my reply
> into Wordpad and Paste it into the Thunderbird editor 3. Post as text
> file.
Bill, that's a lot of extra work to get larger text. In Tbird, just
click on "format", then "size", and pick large, x-large, or xx-large.
--
This message was for rec.woodworking - if it appears in homeownershub
they ripped it off.
woodchucker wrote:
> On 12/28/2013 2:18 AM, Bill wrote:
>> Mike Marlow wrote:
>>> Do you put a new line in between the previous poster's comments and
>>> the comments you are adding? Maybe it's your reader or maybe you're
>>> not putting a new line in before you begin your comments(?). Just
>>> thought I'd let you know...
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> I am aware of the problem Mike. I'm not sure what to do about it (but
>> I'll try a little harder).
>>
>> Whenever I post, I:
>>
>> 1. Edit in HTML-Mode in Thunderbird (so that I can view large text). In
>> text-mode I don't believe I can make it large enough.
>> 2. Copy my reply into Wordpad and Paste it into the Thunderbird editor
>> 3. Post as text file.
>>
>> When I do this, as you've noticed, it does not leave blank lines ahead
>> of my text. I added a couple of blank lines in both places this time,
>> both in the text file and in the html file ahead of where I did the
>> paste. Let's see how it comes out. Bear with me, this must be fixable.
>> Sorry for your inconvenience!
>>
>> Bill
>
> Bill I use thunderbird too, just hit control plus in text mode it makes
> the text larger.
>
I've been playing around with the configurations for a few minutes. BTW,
I use the SeaMonkey email/newsgroup client (which is akin to
Thunderbird)--not actually Thunderbird, but still "Mozilla", I think.
I guess it is the "colored background" feature that I missed (more than
size). I have a "particularly brilliant" monitor, and a colored
background helps alot. Looking at a 23" white background tires the eyes...
Bill
On Sat, 28 Dec 2013 15:55:44 -0500, woodchucker wrote:
>> Bill, that's a lot of extra work to get larger text. In Tbird, just
>> click on "format", then "size", and pick large, x-large, or xx-large.
>>
> Larry, where in newsgroup reader do you have format? I don't it's a
> text version only so no formatting in Tbird
In my version of Tbird (17.0.2) if I click "write" and put the cursor in
the message body, "insert" and "format" will appear at the top of the
screen.
I don't use Tbird for newsgroups, only for email, but I assume you still
click "write" to respond to a post. I could be wrong.
--
This message was for rec.woodworking - if it appears in homeownershub
they ripped it off.
Larry Blanchard wrote:
> On Sat, 28 Dec 2013 15:55:44 -0500, woodchucker wrote:
>
>>> Bill, that's a lot of extra work to get larger text. In Tbird, just
>>> click on "format", then "size", and pick large, x-large, or
>>> xx-large.
>>>
>> Larry, where in newsgroup reader do you have format? I don't it's a
>> text version only so no formatting in Tbird
>
> In my version of Tbird (17.0.2) if I click "write" and put the cursor
> in the message body, "insert" and "format" will appear at the top of
> the screen.
>
> I don't use Tbird for newsgroups, only for email, but I assume you
> still click "write" to respond to a post. I could be wrong.
I think Bill corrected himself and stated that he is using SeaMonkey for
newsgroups. Maybe I misread what he posted, but that's what I thought I
saw. Not being a user of either, I don't know if that makes any difference
or not.
--
-Mike-
[email protected]
Mike Marlow wrote:
> I think Bill corrected himself and stated that he is using SeaMonkey
> for newsgroups. Maybe I misread what he posted, but that's what I
> thought I saw. Not being a user of either, I don't know if that makes
> any difference or not.
Yes, I realized it's not the size, it's the background color. And yes,
it's SeaMonkey 2.17.1--I abandoned the newer version 10 minutes after I
tried it. I suspect there may be a solution to my small dilemma at the
Windows level, but it's not that big a deal to me. Can one of those
fancy email clients offer me a colored background?
Cheers,
Bill
Larry Blanchard wrote:
> On Sat, 28 Dec 2013 15:55:44 -0500, woodchucker wrote:
>
>>> Bill, that's a lot of extra work to get larger text. In Tbird, just
>>> click on "format", then "size", and pick large, x-large, or xx-large.
>>>
>> Larry, where in newsgroup reader do you have format? I don't it's a
>> text version only so no formatting in Tbird
> In my version of Tbird (17.0.2) if I click "write" and put the cursor in
> the message body, "insert" and "format" will appear at the top of the
> screen.
>
> I don't use Tbird for newsgroups, only for email, but I assume you still
> click "write" to respond to a post. I could be wrong.
>
If I post a formatted message, without first passing it through a text
editor (to clean it up), I think it would post with a lot of small errors.
Not sure how you can "format" a text file.
Bill wrote:
> Mike Marlow wrote:
>> I think Bill corrected himself and stated that he is using SeaMonkey
>> for newsgroups. Maybe I misread what he posted, but that's what I
>> thought I saw. Not being a user of either, I don't know if that makes
>> any difference or not.
>
>
>
> Yes, I realized it's not the size, it's the background color. And
> yes, it's SeaMonkey 2.17.1--I abandoned the newer version 10 minutes
> after I tried it. I suspect there may be a solution to my small
> dilemma at the Windows level, but it's not that big a deal to me. Can
> one of those fancy email clients offer me a colored background?
>
I have to say Bill - I'm kind of surprised that your current client can't
offer you that. Colored backgrounds are not really complex things - you'd
think every client could offer that.
--
-Mike-
[email protected]
Bill wrote:
> Mike Marlow wrote:
>> I think Bill corrected himself and stated that he is using SeaMonkey
>> for newsgroups. Maybe I misread what he posted, but that's what I
>> thought I saw. Not being a user of either, I don't know if that makes
>> any difference or not.
>
>
>
> Yes, I realized it's not the size, it's the background color. And
> yes, it's SeaMonkey 2.17.1--I abandoned the newer version 10 minutes
> after I tried it. I suspect there may be a solution to my small
> dilemma at the Windows level, but it's not that big a deal to me. Can
> one of those fancy email clients offer me a colored background?
>
> Cheers,
> Bill
Might want to move this discussion to a different thread so folks don't
abandon all interest in my blade guard! : )
Bill wrote:
> If I post a formatted message, without first passing it through a text
> editor (to clean it up), I think it would post with a lot of small
> errors. Not sure how you can "format" a text file.
Not sure what you are trying to say here Bill. What exactly, is the problem
you are trying to solve? At a point one has to look at the fact that the
vast majority of the people posting to usenet do not have to worry about
these things, and question one's own thoughts. In other words - I think you
may be imagining boogymen that just don't exist. Why not just use a
newsreader and simply post like the rest of us do?
--
-Mike-
[email protected]
Mike Marlow wrote:
> Bill wrote:
>> Mike Marlow wrote:
>>> I think Bill corrected himself and stated that he is using SeaMonkey
>>> for newsgroups. Maybe I misread what he posted, but that's what I
>>> thought I saw. Not being a user of either, I don't know if that makes
>>> any difference or not.
>>
>>
>> Yes, I realized it's not the size, it's the background color. And
>> yes, it's SeaMonkey 2.17.1--I abandoned the newer version 10 minutes
>> after I tried it. I suspect there may be a solution to my small
>> dilemma at the Windows level, but it's not that big a deal to me. Can
>> one of those fancy email clients offer me a colored background?
>>
> I have to say Bill - I'm kind of surprised that your current client can't
> offer you that. Colored backgrounds are not really complex things - you'd
> think every client could offer that.
They could if it was a priority. Evidently it's not. I'm not sure
newsgroups are a priority to the developers.
>
Bill wrote:
> Mike Marlow wrote:
>> Bill wrote:
>>> Mike Marlow wrote:
>>>> I think Bill corrected himself and stated that he is using SeaMonkey
>>>> for newsgroups. Maybe I misread what he posted, but that's what I
>>>> thought I saw. Not being a user of either, I don't know if that makes
>>>> any difference or not.
>>>
>>>
>>> Yes, I realized it's not the size, it's the background color. And
>>> yes, it's SeaMonkey 2.17.1--I abandoned the newer version 10 minutes
>>> after I tried it. I suspect there may be a solution to my small
>>> dilemma at the Windows level, but it's not that big a deal to me. Can
>>> one of those fancy email clients offer me a colored background?
>>>
>> I have to say Bill - I'm kind of surprised that your current client
>> can't
>> offer you that. Colored backgrounds are not really complex things -
>> you'd
>> think every client could offer that.
>
>
>
> They could if it was a priority. Evidently it's not. I'm not sure
> newsgroups are a priority to the developers.
> >
>
It appearsthat after creating a new message, there is a Format menu-item
under Options that will allow one to choose to create the message in
Text--and it doesn't change the background color I see. That's at least
fewer steps than before. This is the maiden-try--let's see how it posts.
Bill
Bill wrote:
>
> It appears that after creating a new message, there is a Format
> menu-item under Options that will allow one to choose to create the
> message in Text--and it doesn't change the background color I see.
> That's at least alot fewer steps than before. This is the
> maiden-try--let's see how it posts.
>
> Bill
That was very nice of you folks to help me fix my newsgroup problem,
that I wasn't even whining about! Now I just need to click one extra
button every time I post (way better than the rigamarole I had been doing!)
Best news years wishes!
Bill
On Wed, 18 Dec 2013 13:31:57 -0500, Bill wrote:
>> http://vintagemachinery.org/photoindex/detail.aspx?id=3666
>>
> Now, I really appreciate the engineering that went into that! : )
> Thanks!
And with some new bearings, mine has absolutely no measurable runout. Of
course, that is easier to accomplish when the blade is mounted rigidly,
the table goes up and down and tilts :-).
--
This message was for rec.woodworking - if it appears in homeownershub
they ripped it off.
--
This message was for rec.woodworking - if it appears in homeownershub
they ripped it off.
I finally finished the article. I really enjoy reading articles like
that one. Here are a few comments:
--The hood having a solid wood front obscures vision too much. It's also
a little too narrow (for my tolerances/comfort zone); he may have built
one before.
--He's got a 1 1/2" diameter conduit beam being supported by just one
mast (bolted to the far right end of his saw).
It bothers me to have that beam hanging... Something is going to
crack, break or sag. I would use 2 masts (some commercial systems use
"nested masts"). In fact, if I had them handy, I might two lamp bases
with a length of EMT between them? Think of the possible lighting! ; )
Yes, we're having fun. I wonder what a Festool Blade Guard would look
like? I guess it would be green. But that's no advantage over having a
solid wood front!
Cheers,
Bill
Swingman wrote:
> On 12/18/2013 5:38 PM, Bill wrote:
>> Someone posted in the comments section of that video, that the person in
>> the video is "standing on the wrong side of the fence". What do you
>> think?
>
> Here, I'll say it again:
>
> "Awareness of and an unflagging practice of "Safety" in the shop is
> unarguably the single most valuable component of a lasting enjoyment
> of same. However, too often in the current world of print and bits and
> bytes, playing the "safety" card has become a mixture of the tone of
> political correctness, a whiff of Wikipedia wisdom, and a nagging fear
> of being held accountable, presented in toto with a smug assertiveness
> that presupposes the purveyor's superior ken, but, in actuality is
> little more than ignorance of underlying issues swept under the shop
> mat."
>
> As Doug and krw indicated, the commentard fits the above to a "T".
>
Thank you Swingman! But "ken"? I need a dictionary to read your posts!
But hey, you tried to put one past me with "commentard" : ) But like
Gramps says, I grok'ed it!
So much ww-lingo to learn!
Bill
Swingman wrote:
> Bill <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Though the fence is Aluminum
>> and may flex a little--you can see I've been reading! ;)
> Don't let the Unifence deter you. Very flexible:
>
> http://www.amazon.com/Uni-t-fence-Table-Fence-Peachtree-Woodworking/dp/B001LYHYH6
This Uni-T-fence is sold in 43" and 36". When ripping a large piece do
you slide your fence forward a bit (toward you), so that you can get
more of the edge of the stuff you are cutting against the fence before
it reaches the blade? Otherwise, I don't understand why one would be
concerned about the additional length here.
Question: If you were trimming a 40" piece of plywood using the fence (I
hesitate to call it "ripping"), would you stand right behind it and hold
it down real well near the blade and hold it real well against the
fence? It seems what is really called for here is a good sled (that
may be supported in part by the extension table as well as the miter
slots). But if that were really true then the fence wouldn't be able
to travel so far away from the blade (50"). I haven't yet really made
sense of this. If I "knew absolutely nothing" this would make more
sense to me...
>
> Works great with the delta Unifence. Been using one for ten years and
> recommend it. Great for jigs and easy add ons, like sacrificial fences.
> Only caveat is that the Unifence doesn't work well with "hold downs" (board
> buddies), which I don't use in any event.
Ah, my recollection had been that you liked the board buddies. Jim
Tolpin, the author of "Table Saw Secrets" certainly likes them for
dados, and especially for stopped dados. That was what got me thinking
about the Uni-T-fence again. The Woodworking Show is coming to town
this weekend.
You surely already know that dado blades are not allowed in some
countries (I just mentioned that for a little "woodworking trivia"). Be
careful when you travel abroad... ; )
Bill
>
On 1/15/2014 12:21 PM, woodchucker wrote:
> On 1/15/2014 12:41 PM, Leon wrote:
>> On 1/15/2014 9:34 AM, woodchucker wrote:
>>> On 1/15/2014 7:14 AM, Doug Miller wrote:
>>>> Swingman <[email protected]> wrote in news:1918116651411466633.755997kac-
>>>> [email protected]:
>>>>
>>>>> Bill <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I know there are a lot of Forrest WW-II fans, but the reviews were
>>>>>> not
>>>>>> very overwhelming, so it's sort of a tough call (but you can see
>>>>>> which way I'm leaning).
>>>>>
>>>>> It is a no brainer call.
>>>>>
>>>>> Buying a Forrest WW-II is not something you will ever regret. If
>>>>> there was
>>>>> a better 'bang for the buck' blade out there trust me, I'd own it.
>>>>
>>>> There is.
>>>>
>>>> http://ridgecarbidetool.com/saws-and-dados/table-saw-blades/10-ts2000.html
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The cut quality is every bit as good as the Forrest WWII at about 80%
>>>> of the price. I bought
>>>> one of these at the Woodworking Show about four years ago, and was
>>>> very impressed. I'll
>>>> never go back to Forrest blades -- especially after having had an
>>>> absolutely miserable
>>>> experience with their service. IMO Forrest is overrated, with respect
>>>> to the quality of both
>>>> their products and their service.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I have had the opposite experience with Forrest. Excellent service.
>>> I also had good service from RC, they had to regrind my Dado set because
>>> the sizes were so far off. a 1/4 dado was 3/32 over. The points were so
>>> much higher than the flat area. When they ground it down, they had to
>>> grind the metal plate to get the sizes close.. Not what I would expect.
>>>
>>> Forrest was great about everything. I went to their shop, just to check
>>> them out.. This is old world methodologies here, most everything is hand
>>> checked to the max. There are machines, but people are the key. These
>>> are machinists.. And they do good work.
>>>
>>> WWII does not dull easily, it's C4 and I had used mine for years before
>>> needing a sharpening.
>>>
>> Must be nice living that close to Forrest.
> Nothing special, where I live, everything is at least an hour away.
Same in Houston. LOL
>>
>> I once sent my Forrest to the sharpening service that I had used back in
>> the 80's and most of the 90's, A couple weeks later I sent it out again
>> to Forrest to be brought back to factory specs. Sooooo I was with out
>> for a couple of weeks more waiting on the trip to and from NJ.
>>
>> Since I have gotten another Forrest to swap out while one goes out for
>> its Spa treatment. ;~)
>>
>> Got still another Forrest, thank you Swingman, when we teamed up on a
>> job together 3 years ago.
>>
>> When I send the blades to Forrest I add the note to bring back to
>> Factory Spec's. If the estimate will be more than $40 call for
>> authorization.
>>
>>
>>
> I want to get another, I have a thin kerf, and will switch to a regular
> kerf next time, as you say I have problems when tapering legs, I now
> start at the bottom of the leg so I am cutting against the grain (so to
> say).
> And when leaning the blade over I have some issues. When I put a 1/8
> kerf blade on I don't have the same issues.
How about that. ;~)
>
> But for my Delta contractor saw, the thin kerf has served me well.
>
I was building decent furniture with my old Craftsman 1 hp and the good
quality regular kerf worked quite well for me.
My blade sharpening guy talked me into a reg kerf combo Systematic blade
that he sold in his store knowing about my underpowered saw.
I was skeptical so he let me use it for 10 days with out having to worry
about being stuck with it if I were not pleased.
I was very pleased and really somewhat shocked at how much better it was
over any thing I had ever used.
When I upgraded in 1999 to the Jet cabinet saw it only saw Forrest
blades, same with my new SawStop.
On 1/15/2014 5:43 PM, Bill wrote:
> Leon wrote:
>> Bill <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> As Jeff suggested, I'll surely buy a lesser blade (if I can find any
>>> full
>>> kerf ones) to practice on. The Freud-Diablo's, IIRC, seem to have
>>> kerf around .91.
>>>
>>> Bill
>> Again, I don't think I would practice on anything other than a Forrest.
>> Lessor blades are going to yield lessor results.
>
> Jeff was just concerned that I might accidentally "burn up the blade"
> during my "learning-phase" and that it would be an expensive lesson...
>
>
>
Not going to burn it up. I have run my Forrest, full up buried,
resawing a 1x6 piece of ipe. Ipe is approximately 2.5 time harder than oak.
Just don't try to screw it up...
Bill <[email protected]> wrote:
> Leon wrote:
>>
>> All in all you can't foresee what is going to be best for you. You
>> cannot foresee all possible problems. You cannot foresee any gotcha's.
>>
>> Like Swingman indicated, until you actually start using the saw, shop,
>> over blade guard/dust collector you have no clue what you are going to
>> actually want to end up with.
>>
>> You can way over think all of this, and possibly put a lot of work
>> into something that you may end up not liking. Better to make a
>> decision from actual experience vs. a preconceived notion of something
>> you have read or think you wold prefer.
>
>
> Okay. But having said that, what do you think of this choice of blades:
>
> (Freud)
> LU74R (30-tooth, "glue-line rip")
> LU-85R (80-tooth, "ultimate cut-off")
>
All probably good blades. I have bought a lot of good blades through the
years, going back to the early 80's,
In 1999 I finally switched to the Forrest WWII 40 tooth Regular kerf blade,
For all cutting I have used nothing else, I do probably more woodworking
than most that post here so my blades see a lot of work compared to most.
Probably at the most I send the blade back to Forrest every 2-3 years to be
brought back to factory spec's.
FWIW I do not give the Forrest blades much thought, I don't long for
something better as I am never disappointed in the smoothness or quality of
the cut. Additionally I don't baby the blades or save them for special
projects, they are tough and stay sharp for a very long time even when
cutting through the occasional finishing nail.
I use this particular blade for "all" off my cuts regardless of the type of
cut I am making. The only exception to this is when I have my Forrest Dado
King mounted or my 15 year old WWII that I had reground to a flat cut for
cutting flat bottom groves
Many swear by switching out to use a dedicated rip blade, I used to do that
but really don't see the advantage over the Forrest WWII unless I plan to
rip a bunch of wood that is over 2" thick. I will say that Forrest now
offers a rip blade, the first ever IIRC.. I don't know if it is better for
ripping or simply to satisfy the customers desires.
Anyway to sum this all up, you will most likely be money ahead if you
simply start off with a Forrest WWII 40 tooth regular kerf blade and not
worry about babying it for any cutting shy of cutting through a bunch of
nails and or cutting material that may have a bunch of grit embedded in it.
Read that as be particular with where the wood comes from, don't cut wood
that the neighbor brings over that has been used out in the street as a
skate board ramp.
> and possibly LU80R ("Ultimate plywood"--so that LU85R above, doesn't get "abused").
I use my WWII for cutting plywood, even the $120 a sheet stuff. I will
share a hint though when cross cutting plywood.
I first make a shallow scoring cut on the bottom of the plywood and then
rise the blade and run the work through again. The result is no tear out
using a WWII blade.
>
> I know there are a lot of Forrest WW-II fans, but the reviews were not
> very overwhelming, so it's sort of a tough call (but you can see which way I'm leaning).
>
I suspect that most are on a budget and don't need the longevity that the
Forrest affords you. Most any new blade will cut well, the test is how
well does that blade cut after 18 months of weekly and daily use.
> According to my measurements, my Biesemeyer Blade spreader is .105-.107
> inches. I'm not sure how small of a kerf I can go down to (and was not
> able to find further direction). Two of the blades above have kerfs of
> .116 and .118. We talking about a 1/100" of an inch, and "blade runout"
> (however much there is) is on my side here, so it doesn't seem like a
> problem. FWIW, I have no plan to cut anything thicker than 3/4" for now.
>
You really don't want to use a thin kerf blade. Thin kerf blades are
marginal problem solvers for saws that are WAY underpowered. The can cause
less than flat cuts in particular when cutting angles and or compound
angles. FWIW I was talked into buying a good quality Regular kerf
Systematic combination blade to use on my "1" hp craftsman TS. That blade
cut better than any thin kerf blade that I had previously used.
> As Jeff suggested, I'll surely buy a lesser blade (if I can find any full
> kerf ones) to practice on. The Freud-Diablo's, IIRC, seem to have kerf around .91.
>
> Bill
Again, I don't think I would practice on anything other than a Forrest.
Lessor blades are going to yield lessor results.
Bill <[email protected]> wrote:
> I know there are a lot of Forrest WW-II fans, but the reviews were not
> very overwhelming, so it's sort of a tough call (but you can see which way I'm leaning).
It is a no brainer call.
Buying a Forrest WW-II is not something you will ever regret. If there was
a better 'bang for the buck' blade out there trust me, I'd own it. It's all
I use except on the rare occasion when I rip 8/4 + hardwoods with a Freud
Glueline Rip, but one of the three WW II's I own is really all that is
necessary at that.
--
www.ewoodshop.com (Mobile)
On 1/15/2014 12:41 PM, Leon wrote:
> On 1/15/2014 9:34 AM, woodchucker wrote:
>> On 1/15/2014 7:14 AM, Doug Miller wrote:
>>> Swingman <[email protected]> wrote in news:1918116651411466633.755997kac-
>>> [email protected]:
>>>
>>>> Bill <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I know there are a lot of Forrest WW-II fans, but the reviews were not
>>>>> very overwhelming, so it's sort of a tough call (but you can see
>>>>> which way I'm leaning).
>>>>
>>>> It is a no brainer call.
>>>>
>>>> Buying a Forrest WW-II is not something you will ever regret. If
>>>> there was
>>>> a better 'bang for the buck' blade out there trust me, I'd own it.
>>>
>>> There is.
>>>
>>> http://ridgecarbidetool.com/saws-and-dados/table-saw-blades/10-ts2000.html
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> The cut quality is every bit as good as the Forrest WWII at about 80%
>>> of the price. I bought
>>> one of these at the Woodworking Show about four years ago, and was
>>> very impressed. I'll
>>> never go back to Forrest blades -- especially after having had an
>>> absolutely miserable
>>> experience with their service. IMO Forrest is overrated, with respect
>>> to the quality of both
>>> their products and their service.
>>>
>>
>> I have had the opposite experience with Forrest. Excellent service.
>> I also had good service from RC, they had to regrind my Dado set because
>> the sizes were so far off. a 1/4 dado was 3/32 over. The points were so
>> much higher than the flat area. When they ground it down, they had to
>> grind the metal plate to get the sizes close.. Not what I would expect.
>>
>> Forrest was great about everything. I went to their shop, just to check
>> them out.. This is old world methodologies here, most everything is hand
>> checked to the max. There are machines, but people are the key. These
>> are machinists.. And they do good work.
>>
>> WWII does not dull easily, it's C4 and I had used mine for years before
>> needing a sharpening.
>>
> Must be nice living that close to Forrest.
Nothing special, where I live, everything is at least an hour away.
>
> I once sent my Forrest to the sharpening service that I had used back in
> the 80's and most of the 90's, A couple weeks later I sent it out again
> to Forrest to be brought back to factory specs. Sooooo I was with out
> for a couple of weeks more waiting on the trip to and from NJ.
>
> Since I have gotten another Forrest to swap out while one goes out for
> its Spa treatment. ;~)
>
> Got still another Forrest, thank you Swingman, when we teamed up on a
> job together 3 years ago.
>
> When I send the blades to Forrest I add the note to bring back to
> Factory Spec's. If the estimate will be more than $40 call for
> authorization.
>
>
>
I want to get another, I have a thin kerf, and will switch to a regular
kerf next time, as you say I have problems when tapering legs, I now
start at the bottom of the leg so I am cutting against the grain (so to
say).
And when leaning the blade over I have some issues. When I put a 1/8
kerf blade on I don't have the same issues.
But for my Delta contractor saw, the thin kerf has served me well.
--
Jeff
Swingman <[email protected]> wrote:
> Doug Miller <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Swingman <[email protected]> wrote in news:1918116651411466633.755997kac-
>> [email protected]:
>>
>>> Bill <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I know there are a lot of Forrest WW-II fans, but the reviews were not
>>>> very overwhelming, so it's sort of a tough call (but you can see which way I'm leaning).
>>>
>>> It is a no brainer call.
>>>
>>> Buying a Forrest WW-II is not something you will ever regret. If there was
>>> a better 'bang for the buck' blade out there trust me, I'd own it.
>>
>> There is.
>>
>> http://ridgecarbidetool.com/saws-and-dados/table-saw-blades/10-ts2000.html
>>
>> The cut quality is every bit as good as the Forrest WWII at about 80% of
>> the price. I bought
>> one of these at the Woodworking Show about four years ago, and was very impressed. I'll
>> never go back to Forrest blades -- especially after having had an absolutely miserable
>> experience with their service. IMO Forrest is overrated, with respect to
>> the quality of both
>> their products and their service.
>
> How does it hold up after sharpening?
>
> My criteria for what I do, besides a top notch cut, is longevity between
> sharpening and number of sharpening cycles. Forrest has excelled in those
> categories for me for years. AAMOF, I have a WW II still in use after 10+
> years that cuts like new.
>
> Don't doubt you have a good blade, but it would take evidence of that kind
> of track record to get me to change. :)
One of my Forrest blades is 15 years old and has probably been resharpened
5 times by Forrest, still cuts like the newer ones.
Bill <[email protected]> wrote:
> Swingman wrote:
>> Bill <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> I know there are a lot of Forrest WW-II fans, but the reviews were not
>>> very overwhelming, so it's sort of a tough call (but you can see which way I'm leaning).
>> It is a no brainer call.
>>
>> Buying a Forrest WW-II is not something you will ever regret. If there was
>> a better 'bang for the buck' blade out there trust me, I'd own it. It's all
>> I use except on the rare occasion when I rip 8/4 + hardwoods with a Freud
>> Glueline Rip, but one of the three WW II's I own is really all that is
>> necessary at that.
>>
>
> Thank you.
>
> 1. With regard to the WW-II, a number of folks were complaining about
> their Cherry wood getting burnt. Have you observed any special issues
> with Cherry (need to cut it faster?)
Regardless of the blade, maple and cherry are very easy to burn if you do
not feed the work fast enough. Even on top of that if the wood has the
slightest amount of bow, read that as absolutely not dead ass flat, any
blade has the potential to burn maple or cherry. Assuming you don't feed
the work an an unusually slow rate any burn/scorch can be removed with a
few light passes of a cabinet scraper and or 180 grit sand paper. IMHO not
a factor for which blade to use.
>
> 2. I assume any blade that is used to cut plywood is going to dull much
> faster than one used for ordinary wood. Does it make sense then to have
> a separate blade for plywood, so you can always have a "nice, sharp" one
> available for cross-cutting wood? And besides those 2, I'd expect to
> use an extra-cheap blade for rough-cutting plywood.
>
People that talk about blades that dull when cutting plywood and materials
that are not "all wood" are using marginal blades to start with.
The WWII is not going to dull quickly regardless if you are cutting plywood
or solid wood. Buy the best to start with and you will not have to worry
about the blade giving poor results and or dulling prematurely. If you are
having worries with a blade that dulls quickly, that blade was a waste of
money to begin with IMHO.
On Wed, 15 Jan 2014 09:11:45 -0600, Leon <[email protected]> wrote:
>Bill <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Leon wrote:
>>>
>>> All in all you can't foresee what is going to be best for you. You
>>> cannot foresee all possible problems. You cannot foresee any gotcha's.
>>>
>>> Like Swingman indicated, until you actually start using the saw, shop,
>>> over blade guard/dust collector you have no clue what you are going to
>>> actually want to end up with.
>>>
>>> You can way over think all of this, and possibly put a lot of work
>>> into something that you may end up not liking. Better to make a
>>> decision from actual experience vs. a preconceived notion of something
>>> you have read or think you wold prefer.
>>
>>
>> Okay. But having said that, what do you think of this choice of blades:
>>
>> (Freud)
>> LU74R (30-tooth, "glue-line rip")
>> LU-85R (80-tooth, "ultimate cut-off")
>>
>
>All probably good blades. I have bought a lot of good blades through the
>years, going back to the early 80's,
>In 1999 I finally switched to the Forrest WWII 40 tooth Regular kerf blade,
>For all cutting I have used nothing else, I do probably more woodworking
>than most that post here so my blades see a lot of work compared to most.
>Probably at the most I send the blade back to Forrest every 2-3 years to be
>brought back to factory spec's.
>
>FWIW I do not give the Forrest blades much thought, I don't long for
>something better as I am never disappointed in the smoothness or quality of
>the cut. Additionally I don't baby the blades or save them for special
>projects, they are tough and stay sharp for a very long time even when
>cutting through the occasional finishing nail.
>
>I use this particular blade for "all" off my cuts regardless of the type of
>cut I am making. The only exception to this is when I have my Forrest Dado
>King mounted or my 15 year old WWII that I had reground to a flat cut for
>cutting flat bottom groves
>
I have 2 40T and bought a 48 T Forest Blade. I took one off to get it
sharpened but judging by the new one I could have waited. The 40T
cuts so well I haven't been motivted yet to try the 48 tooth.
>Many swear by switching out to use a dedicated rip blade, I used to do that
>but really don't see the advantage over the Forrest WWII unless I plan to
>rip a bunch of wood that is over 2" thick. I will say that Forrest now
>offers a rip blade, the first ever IIRC.. I don't know if it is better for
>ripping or simply to satisfy the customers desires.
>
>Anyway to sum this all up, you will most likely be money ahead if you
>simply start off with a Forrest WWII 40 tooth regular kerf blade and not
>worry about babying it for any cutting shy of cutting through a bunch of
>nails and or cutting material that may have a bunch of grit embedded in it.
> Read that as be particular with where the wood comes from, don't cut wood
>that the neighbor brings over that has been used out in the street as a
>skate board ramp.
>
>
>
>> and possibly LU80R ("Ultimate plywood"--so that LU85R above, doesn't get "abused").
>
>I use my WWII for cutting plywood, even the $120 a sheet stuff. I will
>share a hint though when cross cutting plywood.
>I first make a shallow scoring cut on the bottom of the plywood and then
>rise the blade and run the work through again. The result is no tear out
>using a WWII blade.
>
>
>>
>> I know there are a lot of Forrest WW-II fans, but the reviews were not
>> very overwhelming, so it's sort of a tough call (but you can see which way I'm leaning).
>>
>
>I suspect that most are on a budget and don't need the longevity that the
>Forrest affords you. Most any new blade will cut well, the test is how
>well does that blade cut after 18 months of weekly and daily use.
>
>
>> According to my measurements, my Biesemeyer Blade spreader is .105-.107
>> inches. I'm not sure how small of a kerf I can go down to (and was not
>> able to find further direction). Two of the blades above have kerfs of
>> .116 and .118. We talking about a 1/100" of an inch, and "blade runout"
>> (however much there is) is on my side here, so it doesn't seem like a
>> problem. FWIW, I have no plan to cut anything thicker than 3/4" for now.
>>
>
>You really don't want to use a thin kerf blade. Thin kerf blades are
>marginal problem solvers for saws that are WAY underpowered. The can cause
>less than flat cuts in particular when cutting angles and or compound
>angles. FWIW I was talked into buying a good quality Regular kerf
>Systematic combination blade to use on my "1" hp craftsman TS. That blade
>cut better than any thin kerf blade that I had previously used.
>
>
>
>> As Jeff suggested, I'll surely buy a lesser blade (if I can find any full
>> kerf ones) to practice on. The Freud-Diablo's, IIRC, seem to have kerf around .91.
>>
>> Bill
>
>Again, I don't think I would practice on anything other than a Forrest.
>Lessor blades are going to yield lessor results.
On Wed, 15 Jan 2014 18:45:10 -0600, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet>
>Not going to burn it up. I have run my Forrest, full up buried,
>resawing a 1x6 piece of ipe. Ipe is approximately 2.5 time harder than oak.
And with a fully buried blade and just a little experience, one can
tell by the sound if the blade is starting to bog down or the smell
if it's starting to burn.
Bill <[email protected]> wrote:
If I "knew absolutely nothing" this would make more sense to me...
At this point, nothing will answer your questions better than a good deal
more up close and personal experience using your table saw.
--
www.ewoodshop.com (Mobile)
Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet> wrote:
> On 1/16/2014 7:46 PM, Bill wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, 15 Jan 2014 20:30:01 -0600, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Let me warn you. If you use a zero clearance insert, do not tilt the
>>>> blade with the insert in place. That will unflatten the blade in a
>>>> heart beat. ;~) DAMHIKT.
>>>
>>
>> Just rotating the wheel the other direction doesn't fix it, huh? ; )
>>
>> I'll bear your lesson in mind.
>>
> Swingman is not chiming in here but I think he went to that same class as I did. ;~)
Who me?! Yep, BTDT. Generally speaking, if a mistake can be made in the
shop, I've made it. Especially if it involves angles. Yesterday I played
trim carpenter on a bath remodel, pocket door trim, base board, shoe
molding, et al, and managed to dodge angled bullets all day, but only
because I made sure I had sufficient material to allow for my usual screw
ups.
And, this morning, the painters are covering nicely for me. ;)
--
www.ewoodshop.com (Mobile)
"Bill" wrote:
> Okay. But having said that, what do you think of this choice of
> blades:
>
> (Freud)
> LU74R (30-tooth, "glue-line rip")
> LU-85R (80-tooth, "ultimate cut-off")
>
> and possibly LU80R ("Ultimate plywood"--so that LU85R above, doesn't
> get "abused").
-------------------------------------------------------------
Freud once offered a set of blades consisting of a 24T rip, a 50T
General purpose,
and an 80T cross cut ply.
That set met all my needs when I added the 8" Freud stacked dado set.
Might want to check if the set is still offered at a set price.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
"Bill" wrote:
> I know there are a lot of Forrest WW-II fans, but the reviews were
> not very overwhelming, so it's sort of a tough call (but you can see
> which way I'm leaning).
---------------------------------------------------------------
Pardon my French, but after Leon signs off on a blade, who gives a
fuck
what the rest of the world has to say?
Time to spend some money.
Lew
Bill <[email protected]> wrote:
> Swingman wrote:
>> Bill <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> I know there are a lot of Forrest WW-II fans, but the reviews were not
>>> very overwhelming, so it's sort of a tough call (but you can see which way I'm leaning).
>> It is a no brainer call.
>>
>> Buying a Forrest WW-II is not something you will ever regret. If there was
>> a better 'bang for the buck' blade out there trust me, I'd own it. It's all
>> I use except on the rare occasion when I rip 8/4 + hardwoods with a Freud
>> Glueline Rip, but one of the three WW II's I own is really all that is
>> necessary at that.
>>
>
> Thank you.
>
> 1. With regard to the WW-II, a number of folks were complaining about
> their Cherry wood getting burnt. Have you observed any special issues
> with Cherry (need to cut it faster?)
While that is a risk working with cherry to some extent, If the blade is
sharp and the feed rate is even, and the cherry still burns, IME most of
the time it is something other than the blade. Poorly setup tool, reaction
wood, etc.
> 2. I assume any blade that is used to cut plywood is going to dull much
> faster than one used for ordinary wood.
Does it make sense then to have a separate blade for plywood, so you can
always have a "nice, sharp" one available for cross-cutting wood? And
besides those 2, I'd expect to use an extra-cheap blade for rough-cutting
plywood.
Use a WW-II and forget about all that. (I have more than one WW-II just so
I can rotate one to Forrest for sharpening when needed). I've used the same
(high quality) Festool blade to both rough and finish cut more plywood in
the past three years than the average woodworker will cut in 20.
Cheap blades are a waste of time/money.
--
www.ewoodshop.com (Mobile)
Doug Miller <[email protected]> wrote:
> Swingman <[email protected]> wrote in news:1918116651411466633.755997kac-
> [email protected]:
>
>> Bill <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> I know there are a lot of Forrest WW-II fans, but the reviews were not
>>> very overwhelming, so it's sort of a tough call (but you can see which way I'm leaning).
>>
>> It is a no brainer call.
>>
>> Buying a Forrest WW-II is not something you will ever regret. If there was
>> a better 'bang for the buck' blade out there trust me, I'd own it.
>
> There is.
>
> http://ridgecarbidetool.com/saws-and-dados/table-saw-blades/10-ts2000.html
>
> The cut quality is every bit as good as the Forrest WWII at about 80% of
> the price. I bought
> one of these at the Woodworking Show about four years ago, and was very impressed. I'll
> never go back to Forrest blades -- especially after having had an absolutely miserable
> experience with their service. IMO Forrest is overrated, with respect to
> the quality of both
> their products and their service.
How does it hold up after sharpening?
My criteria for what I do, besides a top notch cut, is longevity between
sharpening and number of sharpening cycles. Forrest has excelled in those
categories for me for years. AAMOF, I have a WW II still in use after 10+
years that cuts like new.
Don't doubt you have a good blade, but it would take evidence of that kind
of track record to get me to change. :)
--
www.ewoodshop.com (Mobile)
On 1/14/2014 10:09 PM, Bill wrote:
> Leon wrote:
>>
>> All in all you can't foresee what is going to be best for you. You
>> cannot foresee all possible problems. You cannot foresee any gotcha's.
>>
>> Like Swingman indicated, until you actually start using the saw, shop,
>> over blade guard/dust collector you have no clue what you are going to
>> actually want to end up with.
>>
>> You can way over think all of this, and possibly put a lot of work
>> into something that you may end up not liking. Better to make a
>> decision from actual experience vs. a preconceived notion of something
>> you have read or think you wold prefer.
>
>
> Okay. But having said that, what do you think of this choice of blades:
>
> (Freud)
> LU74R (30-tooth, "glue-line rip")
> LU-85R (80-tooth, "ultimate cut-off")
>
> and possibly LU80R ("Ultimate plywood"--so that LU85R above, doesn't get
> "abused").
>
> I know there are a lot of Forrest WW-II fans, but the reviews were not
> very overwhelming, so it's sort of a tough call (but you can see which
> way I'm leaning).
What reviews were not very good. WWII is generally the best blade in
reviews.
Get yourself a 40T 1/8 kerf blade. You can't use a thin kerf blade with
the Bies splitter.
>
> According to my measurements, my Biesemeyer Blade spreader is .105-.107
> inches. I'm not sure how small of a kerf I can go down to (and was not
> able to find further direction). Two of the blades above have kerfs of
> .116 and .118. We talking about a 1/100" of an inch, and "blade
> runout" (however much there is) is on my side here, so it doesn't seem
> like a problem. FWIW, I have no plan to cut anything thicker than 3/4"
> for now.
>
> As Jeff suggested, I'll surely buy a lesser blade (if I can find any
> full kerf ones) to practice on. The Freud-Diablo's, IIRC, seem to have
> kerf around .91.
>
Just a good way of getting used to the saw before you do something
dumb.. we all do dumb shit when we are learning. If you are not pushing
the envelope you are not learning.
> Bill
--
Jeff
On 1/15/2014 7:14 AM, Doug Miller wrote:
> Swingman <[email protected]> wrote in news:1918116651411466633.755997kac-
> [email protected]:
>
>> Bill <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> I know there are a lot of Forrest WW-II fans, but the reviews were not
>>> very overwhelming, so it's sort of a tough call (but you can see which way I'm leaning).
>>
>> It is a no brainer call.
>>
>> Buying a Forrest WW-II is not something you will ever regret. If there was
>> a better 'bang for the buck' blade out there trust me, I'd own it.
>
> There is.
>
> http://ridgecarbidetool.com/saws-and-dados/table-saw-blades/10-ts2000.html
>
> The cut quality is every bit as good as the Forrest WWII at about 80% of the price. I bought
> one of these at the Woodworking Show about four years ago, and was very impressed. I'll
> never go back to Forrest blades -- especially after having had an absolutely miserable
> experience with their service. IMO Forrest is overrated, with respect to the quality of both
> their products and their service.
>
I have had the opposite experience with Forrest. Excellent service.
I also had good service from RC, they had to regrind my Dado set because
the sizes were so far off. a 1/4 dado was 3/32 over. The points were so
much higher than the flat area. When they ground it down, they had to
grind the metal plate to get the sizes close.. Not what I would expect.
Forrest was great about everything. I went to their shop, just to check
them out.. This is old world methodologies here, most everything is hand
checked to the max. There are machines, but people are the key. These
are machinists.. And they do good work.
WWII does not dull easily, it's C4 and I had used mine for years before
needing a sharpening.
--
Jeff
On 1/15/2014 3:23 AM, Bill wrote:
> Swingman wrote:
>> Bill <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> I know there are a lot of Forrest WW-II fans, but the reviews were not
>>> very overwhelming, so it's sort of a tough call (but you can see
>>> which way I'm leaning).
>> It is a no brainer call.
>>
>> Buying a Forrest WW-II is not something you will ever regret. If there
>> was
>> a better 'bang for the buck' blade out there trust me, I'd own it.
>> It's all
>> I use except on the rare occasion when I rip 8/4 + hardwoods with a Freud
>> Glueline Rip, but one of the three WW II's I own is really all that is
>> necessary at that.
>>
>
> Thank you.
>
> 1. With regard to the WW-II, a number of folks were complaining about
> their Cherry wood getting burnt. Have you observed any special issues
> with Cherry (need to cut it faster?)
One more thing to add concerning burning. There are a lot of schools of
though concerning blade height.
The lower the blade the less exposure you have to it when cutting wood.
BUT the higher it is the less likely of any burning/scorching assuming
the saw is set up correctly. I prefer to have the bottoms of the
carbide teeth to clear the top of the board by about 1/8"
Swingman <[email protected]> wrote in news:1918116651411466633.755997kac-
[email protected]:
> Bill <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> I know there are a lot of Forrest WW-II fans, but the reviews were not
>> very overwhelming, so it's sort of a tough call (but you can see which way I'm leaning).
>
> It is a no brainer call.
>
> Buying a Forrest WW-II is not something you will ever regret. If there was
> a better 'bang for the buck' blade out there trust me, I'd own it.
There is.
http://ridgecarbidetool.com/saws-and-dados/table-saw-blades/10-ts2000.html
The cut quality is every bit as good as the Forrest WWII at about 80% of the price. I bought
one of these at the Woodworking Show about four years ago, and was very impressed. I'll
never go back to Forrest blades -- especially after having had an absolutely miserable
experience with their service. IMO Forrest is overrated, with respect to the quality of both
their products and their service.
Bill <[email protected]> wrote in news:[email protected]:
> 1. With regard to the WW-II, a number of folks were complaining about
> their Cherry wood getting burnt. Have you observed any special issues
> with Cherry (need to cut it faster?)
That's another reason I like the Ridge Carbide blade: it *is* easy to burn cherry with a WWII,
but not quite so easy with the RC blade.
>
> 2. I assume any blade that is used to cut plywood is going to dull much
> faster than one used for ordinary wood.
Faster, anyway, yes.
> Does it make sense then to have
> a separate blade for plywood, so you can always have a "nice, sharp" one
> available for cross-cutting wood?
IMO that depends on how much plywood you cut. I haven't found it necessary.
>And besides those 2, I'd expect to
> use an extra-cheap blade for rough-cutting plywood.
I use a portable circular saw for rough-cutting plywood, not my table saw. Of course, that's
due partly to my shop being in my basement -- with yours being in your garage, it's
obviously much easier for you to cut plywood on your table saw than it would be for me.
Swingman <[email protected]> wrote in news:751993342411487114.398076kac-
[email protected]:
> Doug Miller <[email protected]> wrote:
>> http://ridgecarbidetool.com/saws-and-dados/table-saw-blades/10-ts2000.html
>
> How does it hold up after sharpening?
Don't know -- it hasn't needed sharpening yet. :-)
woodchucker <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:
> On 1/15/2014 7:18 AM, Doug Miller wrote:
>> Bill <[email protected]> wrote in
>> news:[email protected]:
>>
>>> 1. With regard to the WW-II, a number of folks were
>>> complaining about their Cherry wood getting burnt. Have you
>>> observed any special issues with Cherry (need to cut it
>>> faster?)
>>
>> That's another reason I like the Ridge Carbide blade: it *is*
>> easy to burn cherry with a WWII, but not quite so easy with the
>> RC blade.
> How do you know that about the WWII, do you have a different #
> of teeth?
I have one of those also. I prefer the RC blade.
> I have a RC dado set. I would not recommend it to anyone. Size
> wise it had too many issues.
That surprises me. The reason I bought the RC blade is because I
was so happy with the performance of the RC dado set I had bought
a few years previously.
On 1/15/2014 7:18 AM, Doug Miller wrote:
> Bill <[email protected]> wrote in news:[email protected]:
>
>> 1. With regard to the WW-II, a number of folks were complaining about
>> their Cherry wood getting burnt. Have you observed any special issues
>> with Cherry (need to cut it faster?)
>
> That's another reason I like the Ridge Carbide blade: it *is* easy to burn cherry with a WWII,
> but not quite so easy with the RC blade.
How do you know that about the WWII, do you have a different # of teeth?
I have a RC dado set. I would not recommend it to anyone. Size wise it
had too many issues.
>>
>> 2. I assume any blade that is used to cut plywood is going to dull much
>> faster than one used for ordinary wood.
>
> Faster, anyway, yes.
>
>> Does it make sense then to have
>> a separate blade for plywood, so you can always have a "nice, sharp" one
>> available for cross-cutting wood?
>
> IMO that depends on how much plywood you cut. I haven't found it necessary.
>
>> And besides those 2, I'd expect to
>> use an extra-cheap blade for rough-cutting plywood.
>
> I use a portable circular saw for rough-cutting plywood, not my table saw. Of course, that's
> due partly to my shop being in my basement -- with yours being in your garage, it's
> obviously much easier for you to cut plywood on your table saw than it would be for me.
>
--
Jeff
On 1/17/2014 3:29 AM, Mike M wrote:
> On Wed, 15 Jan 2014 09:11:45 -0600, Leon <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Bill <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> Leon wrote:
>>>>
>>>> All in all you can't foresee what is going to be best for you. You
>>>> cannot foresee all possible problems. You cannot foresee any gotcha's.
>>>>
>>>> Like Swingman indicated, until you actually start using the saw, shop,
>>>> over blade guard/dust collector you have no clue what you are going to
>>>> actually want to end up with.
>>>>
>>>> You can way over think all of this, and possibly put a lot of work
>>>> into something that you may end up not liking. Better to make a
>>>> decision from actual experience vs. a preconceived notion of something
>>>> you have read or think you wold prefer.
>>>
>>>
>>> Okay. But having said that, what do you think of this choice of blades:
>>>
>>> (Freud)
>>> LU74R (30-tooth, "glue-line rip")
>>> LU-85R (80-tooth, "ultimate cut-off")
>>>
>>
>> All probably good blades. I have bought a lot of good blades through the
>> years, going back to the early 80's,
>> In 1999 I finally switched to the Forrest WWII 40 tooth Regular kerf blade,
>> For all cutting I have used nothing else, I do probably more woodworking
>> than most that post here so my blades see a lot of work compared to most.
>> Probably at the most I send the blade back to Forrest every 2-3 years to be
>> brought back to factory spec's.
>>
>> FWIW I do not give the Forrest blades much thought, I don't long for
>> something better as I am never disappointed in the smoothness or quality of
>> the cut. Additionally I don't baby the blades or save them for special
>> projects, they are tough and stay sharp for a very long time even when
>> cutting through the occasional finishing nail.
>>
>> I use this particular blade for "all" off my cuts regardless of the type of
>> cut I am making. The only exception to this is when I have my Forrest Dado
>> King mounted or my 15 year old WWII that I had reground to a flat cut for
>> cutting flat bottom groves
>>
> I have 2 40T and bought a 48 T Forest Blade. I took one off to get it
> sharpened but judging by the new one I could have waited. The 40T
> cuts so well I haven't been motivted yet to try the 48 tooth.
I think the 48 is overkill. The 40t is a good all around blade, the 48
would be too oriented to crosscutting and too slow for ripping.
>
>> Many swear by switching out to use a dedicated rip blade, I used to do that
>> but really don't see the advantage over the Forrest WWII unless I plan to
>> rip a bunch of wood that is over 2" thick. I will say that Forrest now
>> offers a rip blade, the first ever IIRC.. I don't know if it is better for
>> ripping or simply to satisfy the customers desires.
>>
>> Anyway to sum this all up, you will most likely be money ahead if you
>> simply start off with a Forrest WWII 40 tooth regular kerf blade and not
>> worry about babying it for any cutting shy of cutting through a bunch of
>> nails and or cutting material that may have a bunch of grit embedded in it.
>> Read that as be particular with where the wood comes from, don't cut wood
>> that the neighbor brings over that has been used out in the street as a
>> skate board ramp.
>>
>>
>>
>>> and possibly LU80R ("Ultimate plywood"--so that LU85R above, doesn't get "abused").
>>
>> I use my WWII for cutting plywood, even the $120 a sheet stuff. I will
>> share a hint though when cross cutting plywood.
>> I first make a shallow scoring cut on the bottom of the plywood and then
>> rise the blade and run the work through again. The result is no tear out
>> using a WWII blade.
>>
>>
>>>
>>> I know there are a lot of Forrest WW-II fans, but the reviews were not
>>> very overwhelming, so it's sort of a tough call (but you can see which way I'm leaning).
>>>
>>
>> I suspect that most are on a budget and don't need the longevity that the
>> Forrest affords you. Most any new blade will cut well, the test is how
>> well does that blade cut after 18 months of weekly and daily use.
>>
>>
>>> According to my measurements, my Biesemeyer Blade spreader is .105-.107
>>> inches. I'm not sure how small of a kerf I can go down to (and was not
>>> able to find further direction). Two of the blades above have kerfs of
>>> .116 and .118. We talking about a 1/100" of an inch, and "blade runout"
>>> (however much there is) is on my side here, so it doesn't seem like a
>>> problem. FWIW, I have no plan to cut anything thicker than 3/4" for now.
>>>
>>
>> You really don't want to use a thin kerf blade. Thin kerf blades are
>> marginal problem solvers for saws that are WAY underpowered. The can cause
>> less than flat cuts in particular when cutting angles and or compound
>> angles. FWIW I was talked into buying a good quality Regular kerf
>> Systematic combination blade to use on my "1" hp craftsman TS. That blade
>> cut better than any thin kerf blade that I had previously used.
>>
>>
>>
>>> As Jeff suggested, I'll surely buy a lesser blade (if I can find any full
>>> kerf ones) to practice on. The Freud-Diablo's, IIRC, seem to have kerf around .91.
>>>
>>> Bill
>>
>> Again, I don't think I would practice on anything other than a Forrest.
>> Lessor blades are going to yield lessor results.
--
Jeff
On 1/15/2014 4:23 AM, Bill wrote:
> Swingman wrote:
>> Bill <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> I know there are a lot of Forrest WW-II fans, but the reviews were not
>>> very overwhelming, so it's sort of a tough call (but you can see
>>> which way I'm leaning).
>> It is a no brainer call.
>>
>> Buying a Forrest WW-II is not something you will ever regret. If there
>> was
>> a better 'bang for the buck' blade out there trust me, I'd own it.
>> It's all
>> I use except on the rare occasion when I rip 8/4 + hardwoods with a Freud
>> Glueline Rip, but one of the three WW II's I own is really all that is
>> necessary at that.
>>
>
> Thank you.
>
> 1. With regard to the WW-II, a number of folks were complaining about
> their Cherry wood getting burnt. Have you observed any special issues
> with Cherry (need to cut it faster?)
>
Bill, certain woods burn. So yes you need to move faster, or you need
less teeth when ripping so you can move faster. This is normal period.
I have many blades. _WWII is my goto blade for good cutting. _
When I need to rough rip a alot of wood, I go to a 24T blade I have.
When I need to work on wood that is questionable, I have a variety of
blades I will use..
> 2. I assume any blade that is used to cut plywood is going to dull much
> faster than one used for ordinary wood. Does it make sense then to have
I cut ply with the WWII it will do it well. I don't cut OSB with a WWII,
I use a crappy Delta blade, or a craftsman blade..
> a separate blade for plywood, so you can always have a "nice, sharp" one
> available for cross-cutting wood? And besides those 2, I'd expect to
> use an extra-cheap blade for rough-cutting plywood.
Just get a good blade to start, you don't need the WWII yet. Get it when
you have made all your mistakes and learned about feed speed.
There is nothing wrong with many of the lower blades, they will be more
rough, and splinter more. But some of them will be better than others.
The Freuds are better than many others, but the thin kerf is not needed
or desirable on your saw.
>
> Bill
--
Jeff
Swingman wrote:
> Bill <[email protected]> wrote:
> If I "knew absolutely nothing" this would make more sense to me...
>
> At this point, nothing will answer your questions better than a good
> deal more up close and personal experience using your table saw.
Correct. One cannot engineer, or design solutions for things that they
don't fully understand. Best to use it first and then tackle approaches to
problems that you see as you use it - regardless of what others are telling
you are the problems that need to be addressed. If that makes any sense...
--
-Mike-
[email protected]
Swingman wrote:
> Bill <[email protected]> wrote:
> If I "knew absolutely nothing" this would make more sense to me...
>
> At this point, nothing will answer your questions better than a good deal
> more up close and personal experience using your table saw.
>
I just don't want it to throw anything at me (and I don't want to be in
the line of fire if it tries....) And I don't want to have to explain
that I didn't know I was doing something in a "stupid" way. As you
suggested, Leon provided me with good answers to my questions.
Bill
Leon wrote:
>
> All in all you can't foresee what is going to be best for you. You
> cannot foresee all possible problems. You cannot foresee any gotcha's.
>
> Like Swingman indicated, until you actually start using the saw, shop,
> over blade guard/dust collector you have no clue what you are going to
> actually want to end up with.
>
> You can way over think all of this, and possibly put a lot of work
> into something that you may end up not liking. Better to make a
> decision from actual experience vs. a preconceived notion of something
> you have read or think you wold prefer.
Okay. But having said that, what do you think of this choice of blades:
(Freud)
LU74R (30-tooth, "glue-line rip")
LU-85R (80-tooth, "ultimate cut-off")
and possibly LU80R ("Ultimate plywood"--so that LU85R above, doesn't get
"abused").
I know there are a lot of Forrest WW-II fans, but the reviews were not
very overwhelming, so it's sort of a tough call (but you can see which
way I'm leaning).
According to my measurements, my Biesemeyer Blade spreader is .105-.107
inches. I'm not sure how small of a kerf I can go down to (and was not
able to find further direction). Two of the blades above have kerfs of
.116 and .118. We talking about a 1/100" of an inch, and "blade
runout" (however much there is) is on my side here, so it doesn't seem
like a problem. FWIW, I have no plan to cut anything thicker than 3/4"
for now.
As Jeff suggested, I'll surely buy a lesser blade (if I can find any
full kerf ones) to practice on. The Freud-Diablo's, IIRC, seem to have
kerf around .91.
Bill
Bill wrote:
> Leon wrote:
>>
>> All in all you can't foresee what is going to be best for you. You
>> cannot foresee all possible problems. You cannot foresee any
>> gotcha's. Like Swingman indicated, until you actually start using the
>> saw,
>> shop, over blade guard/dust collector you have no clue what you are
>> going to actually want to end up with.
>>
>> You can way over think all of this, and possibly put a lot of work
>> into something that you may end up not liking. Better to make a
>> decision from actual experience vs. a preconceived notion of
>> something you have read or think you wold prefer.
>
>
> Okay. But having said that, what do you think of this choice of
> blades:
> (Freud)
> LU74R (30-tooth, "glue-line rip")
> LU-85R (80-tooth, "ultimate cut-off")
>
> and possibly LU80R ("Ultimate plywood"--so that LU85R above, doesn't
> get "abused").
>
> I know there are a lot of Forrest WW-II fans, but the reviews were not
> very overwhelming, so it's sort of a tough call (but you can see which
> way I'm leaning).
>
> According to my measurements, my Biesemeyer Blade spreader is
> .105-.107 inches. I'm not sure how small of a kerf I can go down to
> (and was not able to find further direction). Two of the blades above
> have kerfs of .116 and .118. We talking about a 1/100" of an inch,
> and "blade runout" (however much there is) is on my side here, so it
> doesn't seem like a problem. FWIW, I have no plan to cut anything
> thicker than 3/4" for now.
>
> As Jeff suggested, I'll surely buy a lesser blade (if I can find any
> full kerf ones) to practice on. The Freud-Diablo's, IIRC, seem to
> have kerf around .91.
>
Hey Bill - just an idea - why not just go to your local big box store and
bjy a decent table saw blade? It's certainly going to better than what you
are doing now which is just talking. Buy it, put it on, and see what you
get. You may well find it to be very acceptable. The point is you don't
even know that at this point, and you're exploring areas beyond that.
Hell - just go buy a blade and use that damned saw! You bought it, no go
do what you paid for!
--
-Mike-
[email protected]
Lew Hodgett wrote:
> "Bill" wrote:
>
>> Okay. But having said that, what do you think of this choice of
>> blades:
>>
>> (Freud)
>> LU74R (30-tooth, "glue-line rip")
>> LU-85R (80-tooth, "ultimate cut-off")
>>
>> and possibly LU80R ("Ultimate plywood"--so that LU85R above, doesn't
>> get "abused").
> -------------------------------------------------------------
> Freud once offered a set of blades consisting of a 24T rip, a 50T
> General purpose,
> and an 80T cross cut ply.
Yes, that set has been on my Amazon wish list ever since you mentioned
it, and I even searched the Internet for it (for hours, at first), but
Freud apparent has not chosen to sell that set ("PGM 1060") since. The
salesperson at Rockler remembered it too, but he didn't know whether it
would be offered again either. Studying the details of the set did
however improve my knowledge about blades at the time.
I sort of created my own "1060" set above. I'll see if I can get
abbreviated-pricing at the woodworking show.
>
> That set met all my needs when I added the 8" Freud stacked dado set.
I picked up the same dado set a few months ago when I had a Rockler
20%-off coupon burning a hole in my pocket.
Bill
>
> Might want to check if the set is still offered at a set price.
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
Mike Marlow wrote:
> Hey Bill - just an idea - why not just go to your local big box store
> and bjy a decent table saw blade? It's certainly going to better than
> what you are doing now which is just talking. Buy it, put it on, and
> see what you get. You may well find it to be very acceptable. The
> point is you don't even know that at this point, and you're exploring
> areas beyond that. Hell - just go buy a blade and use that damned saw!
> You bought it, no go do what you paid for!
I was out in the shop/garage checking out my fence with my straight edge
and combination square at about 3:00 AM last night. The fence did well
on my tests, and I took it apart and learned more about how it works.
But it's still Winter here. Please don't "damn" me anything.
Bill
Swingman wrote:
> Bill <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> I know there are a lot of Forrest WW-II fans, but the reviews were not
>> very overwhelming, so it's sort of a tough call (but you can see which way I'm leaning).
> It is a no brainer call.
>
> Buying a Forrest WW-II is not something you will ever regret. If there was
> a better 'bang for the buck' blade out there trust me, I'd own it. It's all
> I use except on the rare occasion when I rip 8/4 + hardwoods with a Freud
> Glueline Rip, but one of the three WW II's I own is really all that is
> necessary at that.
>
Thank you.
1. With regard to the WW-II, a number of folks were complaining about
their Cherry wood getting burnt. Have you observed any special issues
with Cherry (need to cut it faster?)
2. I assume any blade that is used to cut plywood is going to dull much
faster than one used for ordinary wood. Does it make sense then to have
a separate blade for plywood, so you can always have a "nice, sharp" one
available for cross-cutting wood? And besides those 2, I'd expect to
use an extra-cheap blade for rough-cutting plywood.
Bill
Bill wrote:
> Mike Marlow wrote:
>> Hey Bill - just an idea - why not just go to your local big box store
>> and bjy a decent table saw blade? It's certainly going to better than
>> what you are doing now which is just talking. Buy it, put it on, and
>> see what you get. You may well find it to be very acceptable. The
>> point is you don't even know that at this point, and you're exploring
>> areas beyond that. Hell - just go buy a blade and use that damned
>> saw! You bought it, no go do what you paid for!
>
> I was out in the shop/garage checking out my fence with my straight
> edge and combination square at about 3:00 AM last night. The fence
> did well on my tests, and I took it apart and learned more about how
> it works. But it's still Winter here. Please don't "damn" me
> anything.
Very cool - I understand the 3 AM thing. BTW - I was nudging you in a
joking manner - not being critical.
--
-Mike-
[email protected]
Doug Miller wrote:
> Bill <[email protected]> wrote in news:[email protected]:
>
>> 1. With regard to the WW-II, a number of folks were complaining about
>> their Cherry wood getting burnt. Have you observed any special issues
>> with Cherry (need to cut it faster?)
> That's another reason I like the Ridge Carbide blade: it *is* easy to burn cherry with a WWII,
> but not quite so easy with the RC blade.
>> 2. I assume any blade that is used to cut plywood is going to dull much
>> faster than one used for ordinary wood.
> Faster, anyway, yes.
>
>> Does it make sense then to have
>> a separate blade for plywood, so you can always have a "nice, sharp" one
>> available for cross-cutting wood?
> IMO that depends on how much plywood you cut. I haven't found it necessary.
>
>> And besides those 2, I'd expect to
>> use an extra-cheap blade for rough-cutting plywood.
> I use a portable circular saw for rough-cutting plywood, not my table saw. Of course, that's
> due partly to my shop being in my basement -- with yours being in your garage, it's
> obviously much easier for you to cut plywood on your table saw than it would be for me.
Woodcraft (in Indianapolis) has 15% off everything this weekend, so that
would put their WW-II at $115. If I don't do any better at the show, I
may pick one up on the way home.
Doug, get back with me if you have any interest in attending Marc Adams'
3-hour Router Presentation on Friday. I could be talked into going.
Leon wrote:
> Bill <[email protected]> wrote:
>> As Jeff suggested, I'll surely buy a lesser blade (if I can find any full
>> kerf ones) to practice on. The Freud-Diablo's, IIRC, seem to have kerf around .91.
>>
>> Bill
> Again, I don't think I would practice on anything other than a Forrest.
> Lessor blades are going to yield lessor results.
Jeff was just concerned that I might accidentally "burn up the blade"
during my "learning-phase" and that it would be an expensive lesson...
Leon wrote:
> On 1/15/2014 5:43 PM, Bill wrote:
>> Leon wrote:
>>> Bill <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> As Jeff suggested, I'll surely buy a lesser blade (if I can find any
>>>> full
>>>> kerf ones) to practice on. The Freud-Diablo's, IIRC, seem to have
>>>> kerf around .91.
>>>>
>>>> Bill
>>> Again, I don't think I would practice on anything other than a Forrest.
>>> Lessor blades are going to yield lessor results.
>>
>> Jeff was just concerned that I might accidentally "burn up the blade"
>> during my "learning-phase" and that it would be an expensive lesson...
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> Not going to burn it up. I have run my Forrest, full up buried,
> resawing a 1x6 piece of ipe. Ipe is approximately 2.5 time harder
> than oak.
>
> Just don't try to screw it up...
A 20% hook is pretty high, no? The wood may be inclined to feed itself!
Anyway, it appears that I may save some time and money by going with
this blade, so I appreciate the time and effort spent to help make me a
"happy camper"! :)
There was even more convincing than I needed, but maybe someone else
learned something too.
Based on reading a lot of blade reviews, on separate occasions, it does
seem likely that those who were not satisfied probably needed saw
adjustments (or smoother-running belts, or a new saw ; ) In numerous
cases, those that made the adjustments wrote that they got improved results.
Bill
> On Wed, 15 Jan 2014 20:30:01 -0600, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet>
> wrote:
>
>> Let me warn you. If you use a zero clearance insert, do not tilt the
>> blade with the insert in place. That will unflatten the blade in a
>> heart beat. ;~) DAMHIKT.
>
Just rotating the wheel the other direction doesn't fix it, huh? ; )
I'll bear your lesson in mind.
On Wed, 15 Jan 2014 20:30:01 -0600, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet>
wrote:
>Let me warn you. If you use a zero clearance insert, do not tilt the
>blade with the insert in place. That will unflatten the blade in a
>heart beat. ;~) DAMHIKT.
But then you have a home made wobble dado blade. Hopefully of a useful
dimension.
I won't ask but I know.
Mark
On Tue, 14 Jan 2014 18:02:26 -0500, Bill <[email protected]>
wrote:
>I just don't want it to throw anything at me (and I don't want to be in
>the line of fire if it tries....) And I don't want to have to explain
>that I didn't know I was doing something in a "stupid" way. As you
>suggested, Leon provided me with good answers to my questions.
Leather apron if it does helps, but if you pay attention to the saw
you will minimize that problem. One of the reasons my father quit
using his wood working machines was his hearing, he could no longer
hear well enough. Listening to the machine is an important part of
safety.
Bill just so you know you will do "something stupid" or something will
just happen, you are doing your best to minimize that risk. Go out and
have fun making something, if nothing else make some smaller boards.
The experience will help you learn abot your saw.
Mark
On 1/14/2014 5:02 PM, Bill wrote:
> Swingman wrote:
>> Bill <[email protected]> wrote:
>> If I "knew absolutely nothing" this would make more sense to me...
>>
>> At this point, nothing will answer your questions better than a good deal
>> more up close and personal experience using your table saw.
>>
>
> I just don't want it to throw anything at me (and I don't want to be in
> the line of fire if it tries....) And I don't want to have to explain
> that I didn't know I was doing something in a "stupid" way. As you
> suggested, Leon provided me with good answers to my questions.
>
> Bill
>
>
All in all you can't foresee what is going to be best for you. You
cannot foresee all possible problems. You cannot foresee any gotcha's.
Like Swingman indicated, until you actually start using the saw, shop,
over blade guard/dust collector you have no clue what you are going to
actually want to end up with.
You can way over think all of this, and possibly put a lot of work into
something that you may end up not liking. Better to make a decision
from actual experience vs. a preconceived notion of something you have
read or think you wold prefer.
On Wed, 15 Jan 2014 06:59:19 -0600, Markem <[email protected]>
wrote:
>On Tue, 14 Jan 2014 18:02:26 -0500, Bill <[email protected]>
>wrote:
>
>>I just don't want it to throw anything at me (and I don't want to be in
>>the line of fire if it tries....) And I don't want to have to explain
>>that I didn't know I was doing something in a "stupid" way. As you
>>suggested, Leon provided me with good answers to my questions.
>
>Leather apron if it does helps, but if you pay attention to the saw
>you will minimize that problem. One of the reasons my father quit
>using his wood working machines was his hearing, he could no longer
>hear well enough. Listening to the machine is an important part of
>safety.
>
So important, I worked up poles and with a lot of lift equipment. The
young guys hated me as I wouldn't let them listen to music. Tried to
teach them to listento the equipment as a change is sound might be a
warning of failure to come.
>Bill just so you know you will do "something stupid" or something will
>just happen, you are doing your best to minimize that risk. Go out and
>have fun making something, if nothing else make some smaller boards.
>
>The experience will help you learn abot your saw.
>
>Mark
On 1/15/2014 6:59 AM, Markem wrote:
> On Tue, 14 Jan 2014 18:02:26 -0500, Bill <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> I just don't want it to throw anything at me (and I don't want to be in
>> the line of fire if it tries....) And I don't want to have to explain
>> that I didn't know I was doing something in a "stupid" way. As you
>> suggested, Leon provided me with good answers to my questions.
>
> Leather apron if it does helps, but if you pay attention to the saw
> you will minimize that problem. One of the reasons my father quit
> using his wood working machines was his hearing, he could no longer
> hear well enough. Listening to the machine is an important part of
> safety.
Good recommendations. A heavy apron will go a long way in protecting
any body part that it is protecting in the event of something being
thrown back.
>
> Bill just so you know you will do "something stupid" or something will
> just happen, you are doing your best to minimize that risk. Go out and
> have fun making something, if nothing else make some smaller boards.
>
> The experience will help you learn abot your saw.
>
> Mark
>
On 1/15/2014 8:12 PM, Bill wrote:
> Leon wrote:
>> On 1/15/2014 5:43 PM, Bill wrote:
>>> Leon wrote:
>>>> Bill <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>> As Jeff suggested, I'll surely buy a lesser blade (if I can find any
>>>>> full
>>>>> kerf ones) to practice on. The Freud-Diablo's, IIRC, seem to have
>>>>> kerf around .91.
>>>>>
>>>>> Bill
>>>> Again, I don't think I would practice on anything other than a Forrest.
>>>> Lessor blades are going to yield lessor results.
>>>
>>> Jeff was just concerned that I might accidentally "burn up the blade"
>>> during my "learning-phase" and that it would be an expensive lesson...
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> Not going to burn it up. I have run my Forrest, full up buried,
>> resawing a 1x6 piece of ipe. Ipe is approximately 2.5 time harder
>> than oak.
>>
>> Just don't try to screw it up...
>
> A 20% hook is pretty high, no?
I have no idea.
The wood may be inclined to feed itself!
> Anyway, it appears that I may save some time and money by going with
> this blade, so I appreciate the time and effort spent to help make me a
> "happy camper"! :)
> There was even more convincing than I needed, but maybe someone else
> learned something too.
Seriously that blade handles 99.5% of what I want to do with it, the
other .5% is done with the Flat grind Forrest II.
If for some reason the blade does not yield stellar results, you have a
misalignment problem with the saw.
The blade is built and flattened to tight tolerances. I gladly pay a
little extra to have Forrest do the resharpening and tune ups.
typically I pay less than $30 plus shipping. It will be a long time
before it needs that.
Let me warn you. If you use a zero clearance insert, do not tilt the
blade with the insert in place. That will unflatten the blade in a
heart beat. ;~) DAMHIKT.
>
> Based on reading a lot of blade reviews, on separate occasions, it does
> seem likely that those who were not satisfied probably needed saw
> adjustments (or smoother-running belts, or a new saw ; ) In numerous
> cases, those that made the adjustments wrote that they got improved
> results.
>
> Bill
>
On 1/15/2014 9:34 AM, woodchucker wrote:
> Forrest was great about everything. I went to their shop, just to check
> them out.. This is old world methodologies here, most everything is hand
> checked to the max. There are machines, but people are the key. These
> are machinists.. And they do good work.
That's good to hear. I know there have been some folks less than pleased
with Forrest after the old man, Jim Forrest, died a few years back.
Since it is a family business, sure hope it stays on track, and American
made.
--
eWoodShop: www.eWoodShop.com
Wood Shop: www.e-WoodShop.net
https://plus.google.com/+KarlCaillouet/posts
http://www.custommade.com/by/ewoodshop/
KarlCaillouet@ (the obvious)
On 1/17/2014 8:31 AM, woodchucker wrote:
> On 1/17/2014 3:29 AM, Mike M wrote:
>> On Wed, 15 Jan 2014 09:11:45 -0600, Leon <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> Bill <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> Leon wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> All in all you can't foresee what is going to be best for you. You
>>>>> cannot foresee all possible problems. You cannot foresee any
>>>>> gotcha's.
>>>>>
>>>>> Like Swingman indicated, until you actually start using the saw, shop,
>>>>> over blade guard/dust collector you have no clue what you are going to
>>>>> actually want to end up with.
>>>>>
>>>>> You can way over think all of this, and possibly put a lot of work
>>>>> into something that you may end up not liking. Better to make a
>>>>> decision from actual experience vs. a preconceived notion of something
>>>>> you have read or think you wold prefer.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Okay. But having said that, what do you think of this choice of
>>>> blades:
>>>>
>>>> (Freud)
>>>> LU74R (30-tooth, "glue-line rip")
>>>> LU-85R (80-tooth, "ultimate cut-off")
>>>>
>>>
>>> All probably good blades. I have bought a lot of good blades through
>>> the
>>> years, going back to the early 80's,
>>> In 1999 I finally switched to the Forrest WWII 40 tooth Regular kerf
>>> blade,
>>> For all cutting I have used nothing else, I do probably more
>>> woodworking
>>> than most that post here so my blades see a lot of work compared to
>>> most.
>>> Probably at the most I send the blade back to Forrest every 2-3 years
>>> to be
>>> brought back to factory spec's.
>>>
>>> FWIW I do not give the Forrest blades much thought, I don't long for
>>> something better as I am never disappointed in the smoothness or
>>> quality of
>>> the cut. Additionally I don't baby the blades or save them for special
>>> projects, they are tough and stay sharp for a very long time even when
>>> cutting through the occasional finishing nail.
>>>
>>> I use this particular blade for "all" off my cuts regardless of the
>>> type of
>>> cut I am making. The only exception to this is when I have my
>>> Forrest Dado
>>> King mounted or my 15 year old WWII that I had reground to a flat cut
>>> for
>>> cutting flat bottom groves
>>>
>> I have 2 40T and bought a 48 T Forest Blade. I took one off to get it
>> sharpened but judging by the new one I could have waited. The 40T
>> cuts so well I haven't been motivted yet to try the 48 tooth.
>
> I think the 48 is overkill. The 40t is a good all around blade, the 48
> would be too oriented to crosscutting and too slow for ripping.
Perhaps cuz I typically get an almost burnished cut on the end grain
with 40 teeth.
Although it might be better for woods like pine or poplar, soft woods maybe.
On 1/16/2014 7:46 PM, Bill wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 15 Jan 2014 20:30:01 -0600, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Let me warn you. If you use a zero clearance insert, do not tilt the
>>> blade with the insert in place. That will unflatten the blade in a
>>> heart beat. ;~) DAMHIKT.
>>
>
> Just rotating the wheel the other direction doesn't fix it, huh? ; )
>
> I'll bear your lesson in mind.
>
Swingman is not chiming in here but I think he went to that same class
as I did. ;~)
On 1/15/2014 9:34 AM, woodchucker wrote:
> On 1/15/2014 7:14 AM, Doug Miller wrote:
>> Swingman <[email protected]> wrote in news:1918116651411466633.755997kac-
>> [email protected]:
>>
>>> Bill <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I know there are a lot of Forrest WW-II fans, but the reviews were not
>>>> very overwhelming, so it's sort of a tough call (but you can see
>>>> which way I'm leaning).
>>>
>>> It is a no brainer call.
>>>
>>> Buying a Forrest WW-II is not something you will ever regret. If
>>> there was
>>> a better 'bang for the buck' blade out there trust me, I'd own it.
>>
>> There is.
>>
>> http://ridgecarbidetool.com/saws-and-dados/table-saw-blades/10-ts2000.html
>>
>>
>> The cut quality is every bit as good as the Forrest WWII at about 80%
>> of the price. I bought
>> one of these at the Woodworking Show about four years ago, and was
>> very impressed. I'll
>> never go back to Forrest blades -- especially after having had an
>> absolutely miserable
>> experience with their service. IMO Forrest is overrated, with respect
>> to the quality of both
>> their products and their service.
>>
>
> I have had the opposite experience with Forrest. Excellent service.
> I also had good service from RC, they had to regrind my Dado set because
> the sizes were so far off. a 1/4 dado was 3/32 over. The points were so
> much higher than the flat area. When they ground it down, they had to
> grind the metal plate to get the sizes close.. Not what I would expect.
>
> Forrest was great about everything. I went to their shop, just to check
> them out.. This is old world methodologies here, most everything is hand
> checked to the max. There are machines, but people are the key. These
> are machinists.. And they do good work.
>
> WWII does not dull easily, it's C4 and I had used mine for years before
> needing a sharpening.
>
Must be nice living that close to Forrest.
I once sent my Forrest to the sharpening service that I had used back in
the 80's and most of the 90's, A couple weeks later I sent it out again
to Forrest to be brought back to factory specs. Sooooo I was with out
for a couple of weeks more waiting on the trip to and from NJ.
Since I have gotten another Forrest to swap out while one goes out for
its Spa treatment. ;~)
Got still another Forrest, thank you Swingman, when we teamed up on a
job together 3 years ago.
When I send the blades to Forrest I add the note to bring back to
Factory Spec's. If the estimate will be more than $40 call for
authorization.
On 1/15/2014 12:21 PM, Leon wrote:
> On 1/15/2014 3:23 AM, Bill wrote:
>> Swingman wrote:
>>> Bill <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I know there are a lot of Forrest WW-II fans, but the reviews were not
>>>> very overwhelming, so it's sort of a tough call (but you can see
>>>> which way I'm leaning).
>>> It is a no brainer call.
>>>
>>> Buying a Forrest WW-II is not something you will ever regret. If there
>>> was
>>> a better 'bang for the buck' blade out there trust me, I'd own it.
>>> It's all
>>> I use except on the rare occasion when I rip 8/4 + hardwoods with a
>>> Freud
>>> Glueline Rip, but one of the three WW II's I own is really all that is
>>> necessary at that.
>>>
>>
>> Thank you.
>>
>> 1. With regard to the WW-II, a number of folks were complaining about
>> their Cherry wood getting burnt. Have you observed any special issues
>> with Cherry (need to cut it faster?)
>
> One more thing to add concerning burning. There are a lot of schools of
> though concerning blade height.
>
> The lower the blade the less exposure you have to it when cutting wood.
> BUT the higher it is the less likely of any burning/scorching assuming
> the saw is set up correctly. I prefer to have the bottoms of the
> carbide teeth to clear the top of the board by about 1/8"
>
Exactly, I go further then Leon, as I want the gullets clear of the
wood, so the tips get cooled off. Also even higher is a big advantage as
the wood now gets cut down toward the table; when it is low it gets cut
toward you.
When you have a lot of ripping to do, raising the blade as high as
possible will speed the ripping as you can push through much faster with
less resistance and generally cleaner cuts as the blade is only cutting
down.
--
Jeff
On 12/18/2013 3:17 PM, Leon wrote:
> On 12/18/2013 10:48 AM, Bill wrote:
>> Doug Miller wrote:
>>> Bill <[email protected]> wrote in
>>> news:[email protected]:
>>>
>>>> There is some inspiration to be gleaned from the one of this page of
>>>> Grizzly's catalog (bottom of page):
>>>> http://www.grizzly.com/catalog/2013/Main/13
>>> Dust hose attaches in the wrong place. To do any good at all, the dust
>>> hose needs to attach at
>>> the *front* of the blade guard, not the rear.
>>>
>>
>> That makes sense now. How could they have got that wrong (just
>> rhetorical question)?
>> Thanks Doug.
>>
>> Bill
>
> Well It may not be wrong, SawStop claims extreme efficiency with their
> guard and the hose is at the rear. It all depends on the turbulence and
> flow inside the guard.
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IJEi_lWGeLs
>
> I have the SawStop but don't use the guard at all, If I was worried
> about the little bit that comes out on top of the table I would probably
> use the guard but IMHO it is not enough to worry about since you are not
> going to get all of it anyway.
>
> But having said all of that, the vast majority of the saw dust goes
> down inside the saw. Your sander, if used with out a vacuum, might
> produce more dust than the top side of the saw with out guard dust
> collection.
>
> Just saying, it might be a lot of trouble to try to catch 10% of the
> dust on top.
yes but looking at your guard, it is a front collection that redirects
it back to the rear, probably because it is much easier to lift the
guard if the hose is in the rear. I see a baffle that makes the air
travel to the front of the guard, around , up and then back to the hose.
--
Jeff
On Thu, 28 Nov 2013 14:56:25 -0500, Bill <[email protected]>
wrote:
>[email protected] wrote:
>> On Wed, 27 Nov 2013 20:48:47 -0500, Bill <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> [email protected] wrote:
>>>> You'll use the inserts. You'll probably want to buy more, if you do a
>>>> lot of dado cuts. Did I mention that Forrest makes a nice dado set?
>>>> ;-)
>>> I already bought a Freud dado set, with Rockler's 20% off coupon a few
>>> months ago--anticipating that I would one day own a saw. What I need is
>>> a suitable 230W adapter/plug-inlet for the wall. The one I already
>>> purchased doesn't fit the horizontally-slotted plug. That's the sort of
>>> problem you may run into with anticipatory purchases...
>> I replaced the cord on mine to fit the outlet I installed. I don't
>> even remember that it came with a plug, though.
>>
>>>> I really like my JessEm miter gauge (JessEm makes great stuff). The
>>>> Incra 1000HD is really nice, too, though not as solid.
>>> Amazon had the Incra 1000HD on sale for about $110 during last Christmas
>>> season. I'll let you know if I see it.
>>> If you doubt me, check camelcamelcamel.com (I haven't checked, I may be
>>> off by a few dollars).
>> I don't doubt you. I've seen Incra stuff pretty deeply discounted.
>
>I double checked, it was $119.99 last year. At this point, just trying
>to walk around my garage/shop is "an accident waiting to happen". I
>need to flip the saw around, put it on it's proper stand, and put it
>where it needs to go,etc.
>
>Towards that goal, I noticed that Menards has this miter saw stand on
>sale tomorrow for $29.99:
>http://www.menards.com/main/see-more/dat-two-day-sale/portamate-miter-saw-stand/p-2180574-c-13916.htm
I'd just make sure it's plenty solid. It doesn't say how far it
extends but that's another important consideration.
I bought one of these several years ago for my HF saw, when I had no
place to put it or the saw. I found it at a BORG for $100. ;-) I've
seen them free with a saw but I bought a Bosch, eventually. I plan on
a stationary table for it, using it (and the HF saw) for portable use.
http://dewalt.com/tools/machinery-miter-saw-workstations-dwx723.aspx
On 1/14/2014 5:25 AM, Bill wrote:
> Swingman wrote:
>> Bill <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> Though the fence is Aluminum
>>> and may flex a little--you can see I've been reading! ;)
>> Don't let the Unifence deter you. Very flexible:
>>
>> http://www.amazon.com/Uni-t-fence-Table-Fence-Peachtree-Woodworking/dp/B001LYHYH6
>>
>
> This Uni-T-fence is sold in 43" and 36". When ripping a large piece do
> you slide your fence forward a bit (toward you), so that you can get
> more of the edge of the stuff you are cutting against the fence before
> it reaches the blade? Otherwise, I don't understand why one would be
> concerned about the additional length here.
Sliding the fence out toward you to give you more of a guide before
reaching the blade would be a definite advantage. If you check into
most Euro style table saws most all use this type fence.
The big advantage would be when cutting sheets of plywood and you are
about 7' back from the front of the saw. It is tough to keep the panel
parallel along a 12" section of fence before a blade than a much longer
section before the blade.
Secondly you can use the fence to cross cut shore pieces more safely.
The end of the fence can be slid to the front of the blade so that short
pieces will not be trapped between the fence and the blade.
>
> Question: If you were trimming a 40" piece of plywood using the fence (I
> hesitate to call it "ripping"), would you stand right behind it and hold
> it down real well near the blade and hold it real well against the
> fence? It seems what is really called for here is a good sled (that
> may be supported in part by the extension table as well as the miter
> slots). But if that were really true then the fence wouldn't be able
> to travel so far away from the blade (50"). I haven't yet really made
> sense of this. If I "knew absolutely nothing" this would make more
> sense to me...
That would depend on the other dimension of the 40" piece of plywood.
Consider that the heavier the piece of panel the less likely that the
blade will throw the panel any appreciable distance. ;~)
If I am trimming a few inches off of a 40 x40 panel I stand in the
middle of the panel pushing with my right hand and using my left hand to
gently push the panel up against the fence. Basically I give most of
the push towards the blade with my right hand and a little bit of push,
just enough to keep the panel flat against the fence, with my left hand.
>
>>
>> Works great with the delta Unifence. Been using one for ten years and
>> recommend it. Great for jigs and easy add ons, like sacrificial fences.
>> Only caveat is that the Unifence doesn't work well with "hold downs"
>> (board
>> buddies), which I don't use in any event.
>
> Ah, my recollection had been that you liked the board buddies. Jim
> Tolpin, the author of "Table Saw Secrets" certainly likes them for
> dados, and especially for stopped dados. That was what got me thinking
> about the Uni-T-fence again. The Woodworking Show is coming to town
> this weekend.
>
> You surely already know that dado blades are not allowed in some
> countries (I just mentioned that for a little "woodworking trivia"). Be
> careful when you travel abroad... ; )
>
> Bill
Actually I believe it is the "stacked" dado blades that are frowned
upon. There are however dado blades, they call them something else.
that will cut wide slots. These are typically more like a sharper
cutter as they are wide and fixed in width IIRC.
http://www.felder-tooling.us/8head-017420/8head-019220/8head-wkzg-00920-8ba-k3-008-813-00120/8500-03-019-text-0320#
On 11/26/2013 1:43 PM, Bill wrote:
> Look at the splitter on the 2002 (look towards the bottom of the pdf).
> Was it a new innovation at the time?
I think Mike M is correct. I bought the saw without an overhead guard,
purchased and installed one later, but I do not recall exactly the
splitter setup that came stock ... been a long time.
Which means that somewhere in this shop is another splitter? And where,
beats the helloutta me.
I'll have to get the manuals down from a top shelf and take a look.
I installed the overhead guard, a two man job, by myself, and ended up
with 13 stitches in my right thumb during the installation.
That I do remember, which may be why I have forgotten what came before. ;)
--
eWoodShop: www.eWoodShop.com
Wood Shop: www.e-WoodShop.net
google.com/+KarlCaillouet
http://www.custommade.com/by/ewoodshop/
KarlCaillouet@ (the obvious)
On Tue, 26 Nov 2013 15:19:46 -0500, "Mike Marlow"
<[email protected]> wrote:
>Jim Weisgram wrote:
>
>>
>> Riving knife? Much safer than a splitter because it always hugs the
>> blade. You are aware that you can't retrofit a riving knife to a saw
>> that came without one? Unless you manage to fabricate it yourself
>> somehow. Which would then void your "warranty".
>>
>
>Indeed - much safer than a splitter. Void your warranty? Not at all
>necessarily. Most older saws don't even have a warrnaty in place, but even
>for newer saws that my have one, installing a riving knife need not
>necessarily void the warranty.
Sorry. Warranty in quotes was intended to indicate my tongue was
firmly stuck to one of my cheeks. Not saying which one.
On Wed, 27 Nov 2013 19:33:43 -0500, Bill <[email protected]>
wrote:
>Bill wrote:
>> I was looking at parts diagram for a 2002 Unisaw. <snip>
> It just takes one other person to makes an auction difficult, and he
>was there (he probably thinking the same thing)! We had to go from $500
>to $1050 before I convinced this person I was pretty serious about
>getting a saw! And that's the dollar amount I payed--$1050+10% +7%
>(sales tax), in case anyone is curious. I felt like I didn't want to do
>any more saw shopping--and this one was only about 5 miles from home--so
>I thought beforehand that it wasn't going to get any easier. I met a
>kind person who helped me get the saw home on his trailer--I had talked
>with him for 10 or 15 minutes before they got to auctioning the
>machinery. While I was collecting parts in a plastic garbage bag that I
>brought with me for the occasion, he asked me if I needed any help
>moving the saw. And I said yes, please. And he said, where's your truck.
>And I said, I don't have a truck. Can we put in in yours?--I said I
>live close by and I will be glad to give you $100 to help me. His
>trailer featured a hand-powered winch-which was handy pulling it up and
>letting it down some improvised ramps. He did a lot of work though,
>securing the saw. He got he out of a "tough jam". I thanked him and
>tried to hand him $100, buy him a tank or two of gas, etc. but he would
>only take $5 for gas. A nice guy who made a real difference, like many
>of you folks.
Sounds like a really nice guy. Do you have his name/address? You
might try sending him something for the holidays (something a little
nicer than a fruitcake ;-), with a note thanking him again.
You'll love the saw. Now you need a good miter gauge (the Delta
sucks) and a few Forrest blades. ;-)
On 11/27/2013 7:33 PM, Bill wrote:
> Bill wrote:
>> I was looking at parts diagram for a 2002 Unisaw. <snip>
> It just takes one other person to makes an auction difficult, and he
> was there (he probably thinking the same thing)! We had to go from $500
> to $1050 before I convinced this person I was pretty serious about
> getting a saw! And that's the dollar amount I payed--$1050+10% +7%
> (sales tax), in case anyone is curious. I felt like I didn't want to do
> any more saw shopping--and this one was only about 5 miles from home--so
> I thought beforehand that it wasn't going to get any easier. I met a
> kind person who helped me get the saw home on his trailer--I had talked
> with him for 10 or 15 minutes before they got to auctioning the
> machinery. While I was collecting parts in a plastic garbage bag that I
> brought with me for the occasion, he asked me if I needed any help
> moving the saw. And I said yes, please. And he said, where's your truck.
> And I said, I don't have a truck. Can we put in in yours?--I said I
> live close by and I will be glad to give you $100 to help me. His
> trailer featured a hand-powered winch-which was handy pulling it up and
> letting it down some improvised ramps. He did a lot of work though,
> securing the saw. He got he out of a "tough jam". I thanked him and
> tried to hand him $100, buy him a tank or two of gas, etc. but he would
> only take $5 for gas. A nice guy who made a real difference, like many
> of you folks.
>
> Bill
>
Congratulations Bill. Good luck with your new saw.
Give it a thorough look over. Clean it up.. you can use 400 to 600 wet
dry sandpaper, for the top, or a green scotch brite.. cut it round and
use your random orbital sander...
wax it using butcher wax and enjoy.
Build yourself a cross cut sled for 90degree cuts and look for the incra
miter on sale for angled cuts.
And go make something.. build some jigs to learn how to use the tool
before you tackle your first big project.
--
Jeff
On 12/18/2013 8:21 PM, Bill wrote:
> Thank you Swingman! But "ken"? I need a dictionary to read your posts!
> But hey, you tried to put one past me with "commentard" : ) But like
> Gramps says, I grok'ed it!
> So much ww-lingo to learn!
LOL. "d'ye ken?", AKA Scots for: "Do you know?".
Heard the word daily from a good friend, a London Bobby, many years (50)
ago, and it stuck.
From Scotland, I could understand him perfectly until we crossed the
border at Gretna Green to visit his parents in Carluke, a small village
outside of Glasgow, then it might as well have been Gaelic he was
speaking to the locals, when we begged water to fill up the Morris
Minor's radiator, which leaked like a sieve.
Sir Walter Scott, a good read, and user of the word, also ... ;)
I digress.
--
eWoodShop: www.eWoodShop.com
Wood Shop: www.e-WoodShop.net
google.com/+KarlCaillouet
http://www.custommade.com/by/ewoodshop/
KarlCaillouet@ (the obvious)