I've had Freud's new box joint blade for almost 2 months now and have cut
box joints in poplar, oak, pine, and even baltic birch plywood with it.
I've been highly impressed with the quality of the cut...perfectly square
and clean with no chipout (it helps to use a new backer board each time you
change the cut depth or width to a shallower setting). This blade cuts
cleaner and squarer box joints than anything else that I've ever used, and
I've made a lot of box joints in my life. I've made them with both dado
blades (even Freud's dado blades) and router bits and never consistently
achieved cuts anywhere near as clean as this.
However, it is necessary to make a good box joint jig to use with it to get
really good results. The blade comes with instructions for making a box
joint fixture, but I wasn't very impressed with their design. The jig needs
to have micro adjustment capability built into it so that you can dial in
the exact position of the cut to get both the cuts and spaces between the
cuts to be exactly the same width, and this needs to be done each time that
you set up the fixture. You also need to understand that to get repeatable
spacing in your box joints requires the elimination of all side play in your
fixture, the saw table slide, and also in the placement of your boards when
you make each cut. I always work from left to right and always place my
boards against the left side of the fixture pin before making each cut. This
eliminates the possibility of any indexing variation that might be caused by
the width of the fixture pin. In fact the pin width is not important, only
the position of it's left side. By referencing the board against the left
side of the fixture pin each time I make a cut, and by carefully adjusting
the fixture so that my cuts and the resulting spaces between the cuts are
equal, I can get perfect box joints every time.
I have no connection with Freud. I'm just a very satisfied customer.
--
Charley
"JJ" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Anyone try the Freud Boxjoint blade yet? They claim a "squarer" and
cleaner
> pass of the blade.
>
"JJ" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Anyone try the Freud Boxjoint blade yet? They claim a "squarer" and
> cleaner
> pass of the blade.
>
Why bother? Best box-joint jig going is so simple, you'd be embarrassed.
http://us.oak-park.com/catalogue.html?list=boxj-- Sixth-graders could use
it safely and successfully. None of them were even allowed to use the
tablesaw, for safety reasons.
Unless, of course, you're just looking for a new tool.
"David" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> George wrote:
>
>> "JJ" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]...
>>
>>>Anyone try the Freud Boxjoint blade yet? They claim a "squarer" and
>>>cleaner
>>>pass of the blade.
>>>
>>
>>
>> Why bother? Best box-joint jig going is so simple, you'd be embarrassed.
>> http://us.oak-park.com/catalogue.html?list=boxj-- Sixth-graders could
>> use it safely and successfully. None of them were even allowed to use
>> the tablesaw, for safety reasons.
>>
>> Unless, of course, you're just looking for a new tool.
> your comments have nothing to do with the OP's question about a specific
> blade.
>
Sure it does. It says the blade is an unnecessary expense whose purpose can
be better accomplished with a tool he probably already possesses.
It's sort of like side rabbet planes. The job it does isn't worth the
price, because there are superior means of accomplishing the same purpose.
Which is why I suggested that to you.
"CW" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> What an arrogant prick. No, you didn't answer the mans question. You seem
> to
> believe that there is a single best way to do anything and your way is it.
> I've got some news for you. You are not The Enlightened One.
>
You have provided a perfect self-description. If you should ever learn to
read on the road to learning to think, you would note that the comparative
not superlative or declarative form was used.
A better way - there's that comparative again - to accomplish the task(s) is
available with the tools on hand, and should be evaluated. The obvious -
that you know nothing about it - may be reason enough to you to reject it,
but others of greater sense will apply their mind, not their mouth, to the
issue. They may even come to the same conclusion.
Charley said:
>I've had Freud's new box joint blade for almost 2 months now and have cut
>box joints in poplar, oak, pine, and even baltic birch plywood with it.
>I've been highly impressed with the quality of the cut...perfectly square
>and clean with no chipout (it helps to use a new backer board each time you
>change the cut depth or width to a shallower setting). This blade cuts
>cleaner and squarer box joints than anything else that I've ever used, and
>I've made a lot of box joints in my life. I've made them with both dado
>blades (even Freud's dado blades) and router bits and never consistently
>achieved cuts anywhere near as clean as this.
>
>However, it is necessary to make a good box joint jig to use with it to get
>really good results. The blade comes with instructions for making a box
>joint fixture, but I wasn't very impressed with their design. The jig needs
>to have micro adjustment capability built into it so that you can dial in
>the exact position of the cut to get both the cuts and spaces between the
>cuts to be exactly the same width, and this needs to be done each time that
>you set up the fixture. You also need to understand that to get repeatable
>spacing in your box joints requires the elimination of all side play in your
>fixture, the saw table slide, and also in the placement of your boards when
>you make each cut. I always work from left to right and always place my
>boards against the left side of the fixture pin before making each cut. This
>eliminates the possibility of any indexing variation that might be caused by
>the width of the fixture pin. In fact the pin width is not important, only
>the position of it's left side. By referencing the board against the left
>side of the fixture pin each time I make a cut, and by carefully adjusting
>the fixture so that my cuts and the resulting spaces between the cuts are
>equal, I can get perfect box joints every time.
>
>
>I have no connection with Freud. I'm just a very satisfied customer.
Excellent summation. I've wondered about this blade as well, after
having seen it talked about here.
I make a lot of box joints... Don't ask me why... I don't know...
Greg G.
What an arrogant prick. No, you didn't answer the mans question. You seem to
believe that there is a single best way to do anything and your way is it.
I've got some news for you. You are not The Enlightened One.
"George" <George@least> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Sure it does. It says the blade is an unnecessary expense whose purpose
can
> be better accomplished with a tool he probably already possesses.
>
> It's sort of like side rabbet planes. The job it does isn't worth the
> price, because there are superior means of accomplishing the same purpose.
> Which is why I suggested that to you.
>
>
>
>
George wrote:
> "JJ" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>
>>Anyone try the Freud Boxjoint blade yet? They claim a "squarer" and
>>cleaner
>>pass of the blade.
>>
>
>
> Why bother? Best box-joint jig going is so simple, you'd be embarrassed.
> http://us.oak-park.com/catalogue.html?list=boxj-- Sixth-graders could use
> it safely and successfully. None of them were even allowed to use the
> tablesaw, for safety reasons.
>
> Unless, of course, you're just looking for a new tool.
>
>
your comments have nothing to do with the OP's question about a specific
blade.
Dave
David wrote:
> JJ wrote:
>
>> Anyone try the Freud Boxjoint blade yet? They claim a "squarer" and
>> cleaner
>> pass of the blade.
>
> I use one of the side blades of my Freud SD-508 when I want I clean cut
> when I need square slot edges. I use the router table for box joints
> (Incra templates & fence).
>
> What's the width of the boxjoint blade?
>
> Dave
good grief! too much editing and not enough proofreading!
Correct version: I use one of the side blades when I need square slot
edges (like in knife blocks).
Dave
JJ wrote:
> Anyone try the Freud Boxjoint blade yet? They claim a "squarer" and cleaner
> pass of the blade.
>
I use one of the side blades of my Freud SD-508 when I want I clean cut
when I need square slot edges. I use the router table for box joints
(Incra templates & fence).
What's the width of the boxjoint blade?
Dave
On Sun, 13 Nov 2005 08:54:47 -0500, "George" <George@least> wrote:
>
>"CW" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>> What an arrogant prick. No, you didn't answer the mans question. You seem
>> to
>> believe that there is a single best way to do anything and your way is it.
>> I've got some news for you. You are not The Enlightened One.
>>
>
>You have provided a perfect self-description.
What a simplistic idiot.
I'm amazed that you would put such a silly response to type.
You need to spend some time with people and stop hiding behind the
keyboard and news groups. I would love to see you say something like
"You have provided a perfect self-description" in a room full of
people. The look on their faces would be priceless.
Don't waste your ink on me, Sparky, you are a fool beyond argument.
No. your'e not an "arrogant prick" your'e an Arrogant
Fool.
Into the kill file for you.
Watch folks, he will respond to this knowing I won't read it.
He can't help himself!
On Thu, 10 Nov 2005 18:38:38 -0600, JJ <[email protected]> wrote:
>Anyone try the Freud Boxjoint blade yet? They claim a "squarer" and cleaner
>pass of the blade.
Haven't used it, but I like how the teeth overhang the plate more on
one side than the other and with the blades in one order you get 1/4
inch, and by shuffling them so the other blade is next to the arbor
nut you get 3/8 inch. No fussing with spacers, etc.
I don't do a lot of box joints, but if I did, I'd certainly give it a
try...
Paul