Replies

1. 
   forestgirl | Mar 28, 2005 05:26pm | #1

   "...because it's technically possible but not actually practical?"  The article makes it pretty clear that it's quite practical, but the author primarily uses the technique for planing highly-figured wood that might tear out significantly when run through a regular planer.

   I'd not trade my jointer in for a sled, but add the sled to the repetoire.  A sled would be a royal pain on a 4-6' long plank, LOL! 

   forestgirl -- you can take the girl out of the forest, but you can't take the forest out of the girl ;-)
   Another proud member of the  "I Rocked With ToolDoc Club" .... :>) 

1. 
   MatthewSchenker | Mar 28, 2005 06:26pm | #3

   forestgirl,
   Of course, this is not a new idea. I first read about it a couple of years ago in R.J. De Cristoforo's, "The Portable Router Book." I believe De Cristoforo talks about this as a general replacement for surface planing, not only for unruly grains.When I asked the question about "practical" versus "possible" I was being semi-humorous. I have developed a silent concept I refer to as the Possible-Possible/Practical scale. There are jigs and fixtures that are more possible than practical, and there are numerous jigs that are both possible and practical. I just try to assess where each one lies on this scale.Very often, when you build a jig or fixture from a woodworking magazine, you discover all kinds of important details, not mentioned in the article, that hinder actual success -- this would be a project at the possible end of the scale. There are many times when those jigs and fixtures have been amazing and I love using them -- they are at the possible/practical end.

1. 
   mvac | Mar 28, 2005 08:26pm | #4

   Matthew,

   Is it me, or has there been a rash of articles on this subject over the last couple of months?

   I also had the same reservations you did, and probably still do. Even with a 3/4" bit, which I don't have, it would take a long time to flatten a board that way. Still, assuming the jig is well-constructed and you're given enough details about both its construction and its operation, it's likely to be more exacting than flattening by hand, in addition to treating highly figured wood more gently as ForestGirl said.

   I'm gonna have to look at the article to see how long it would take to make the jig.

   My most important criteria for building a jig include:

   How frequently I'd use it;

   How much time it would save;

   How much more precision I'd get; and

   How much time it would take me to build it.

   My guess is that at this point I wouldn't use it that often, and I'm not sure how much time it would save me - if I can clean it up enough with my handplanes, I might get a decent face with the planer, certainly with the jointer if the board were narrow enough.

   If you do decide to build it, please let us know how long it took and what, if any, unexpected issues you encountered.

   Regards,Mitch

   "I'm always humbled by how much I DON'T know..."

1. 
   Sphere | Mar 28, 2005 09:11pm | #5

   Along the same lines, when I was building pipeorgans we often had to resurface the windchests..say 5' x 8' .  By securing two rails on the sides and the router riding two rails that rode on those two rails we had a true X/Y axis milling setup.

   The new surface had to be alble to be airtite. Picture a box with a lot of channels that need to be sealed to the top perfectly.

   It worked well, and was quick to set up with some simple leveling. The same can be done with a plain ol plank if you really want to..we had no choice, there was no machine that could handle such a big surfacing job.

   FWIW, I'd buy a jointer and planer. 

   Spheramid Enterprises Architectural Woodworks

   "Sell your cleverness, Purchase Bewilderment"...Rumi

1. 
   patternmaker | Mar 29, 2005 07:16pm | #12

   The method that you describe is common practice in the patternmaking trade. I use a black granite surface plate measuring 36"X48"X4" in thickness. I keep a selection of straight edges nearby for this and general use. Most are made of "perfect plank"mahagony,ripped to various widths.This,as you may know,is a laminated wood that is very stable.The cross piece that is the guide for the router has a blind slot running almost from end to end.Thus,the router guide does not have to be much longer then the width of the part to be planed. I use a few pieces of double faced tape to stabilize the part during the cutting operation. AS for the dust,this setup is easy to add the hose from the shop vacuum.
   Thank you,Mr.Croney,where ever you may be.
   Work safely ¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬PAT¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬

   Edited 3/29/2005 12:18 pm ET by Pat

2. 
   JohnSprung | Mar 30, 2005 02:50am | #14

   > we had a true X/Y axis milling setup.

   This sounds like a good application for one of those old Bridgeport mills.  They're basically just a gigantic high precision high power router and x/y/z table. 

    

   -- J.S.

    

3. 
   Sphere | Mar 30, 2005 02:01pm | #15

   When I moved on to Guitars ( much lighter..LOL) we purchased a DTT ( I think,) Digital Tool Tech.  CNC. This was back in 1990.

   It had a duel head set up...a 7.5 HP Perske "router" and a 220 V Bosch router.  We added Carter Vacuum Pods table and man, it was cool.

   I could take a Blueprint, and digitize it with a crosshair puck mouse.  Suck down a body blank on the pods and zero one corner..hit the "do it" button and in 2 minutes or less a completely cut out solid body was profiled and drilled and routed for pickups, flip it over, do it button, and the control cavity and neck bolt holes got done.

   I miss that tool.  

   Spheramid Enterprises Architectural Woodworks

   "Sell your cleverness, Purchase Bewilderment"...Rumi

2. 
   MarkRoderick | Mar 28, 2005 10:39pm | #6

   Personally I find it hard to imagine putting up with the noise and dust such a setup would produce. Would it take any longer using a scrub plane followed by a jack plane? If you have a planer wide enough to take the board you're jointing, all you're trying to do is get it roughly flat.

   If I had a big panel, wider than my planer, I'd seriously consider taking it to a shop that has a wide belt surfacer.

   Only in very, very unusual circumstances, such as the pipe organ mentioned above, would I unleash the router for this job. I would just find the noise and dust unbearable.

1. 
   MarkRD | Mar 28, 2005 11:16pm | #7

   I'd have to go with MarkR on this one. Find a local shop that can surface your wide stock.There are so many variables in the router as planer method, that you'll never be able to control them all - it doesn't seem worth the risk.Mark

   Measure it with a micrometer, mark it with chalk, cut it with an ax.

2. 
   MatthewSchenker | Mar 29, 2005 04:17am | #8

   Mark,
   This is what I was referring to when I mentioned the possible-possible/practical scale.

2. 
   forestgirl | Mar 29, 2005 08:19am | #9

   "There are jigs and fixtures that are more possible than practical"  No kidding!  Great concept you have there.  The ones (jigs) that really get me are the ones that look like you need an engineering degree, advanced no less, to understand how they work, and which have much simpler counterparts that do the same job equally as well.

   The router-planing-sled really doesn't look very complicated at all, but it would take up a fair amount of space (important consideration for me).  I'd sure use it if the right piece of wood presented itself.  I'd use a 1.5" or 2" bit, though, loaded up in that big Freud plunge router.forestgirl -- you can take the girl out of the forest, but you can't take the forest out of the girl ;-)Another proud member of the  "I Rocked With ToolDoc Club" .... :>) 

2. 
   douglas2cats | Mar 28, 2005 06:05pm | #2

   Other than the reason FG stated, I think the other reason the author mentioned was for cases where the board needed flattening and was too big for the planer/jointer and he didn't want to slice it up for grain matching reasons. Seems like that might be quicker than using handplanes, but either way it's a lot of work.

    

   Waddaya mean it wont fit through the door?

3. 
   Alphonse | Mar 29, 2005 02:02pm | #10

   Yes,it works well,is accurate (dependent upon your set-up) and works forfigured wood and end grain.

   It doesn't need to be slow.Strategy dependent.

   Won't compete with jointers/planers for speed though.

   Try moving a 28"x 72" slab of 8/4 crotch walnut over your jointer though.

1. 
   Garry | Mar 29, 2005 04:02pm | #11

   I agreee with you Alphonse.Years ago I made an Apparatuses simular to this to resurface the top of my workbench after my kids had a hay day with handsaws and hammers on it. This technique did work well but as you have indicated it is used for special puposes.

   GarryWoodWorks by Garry

4. 
   WillGeorge | Mar 29, 2005 09:11pm | #13

   I made one once... I was never satisfied with it... Worked OK BUT..

   I just take the wood and have them surfaced on both faces..... Cost is NOT outlandish but you may have to wait a day or two..