I’ve been looking at a new planer for a while now. I find it very disheartening to get really excited about a planer only to scroll down to the specs and see that the two speeds are 16 feet per minute and 20 feet per minute. I barely see the point in having two speeds if they’re basically the same. But that’s not what this post is about.
For as long as I can remember, I’ve thought about feed rate like this: Faster feed rate is for dimensioning lumber and quick stock removal. Slower speed rates are for finishing passes.
Today, I was on the Powermatic site comparing planers and I see a notice in the description that said the exact opposite of what I’ve believed to be true for years. They say a slower speed rate is better for dimensioning lumber (ostensibly because you can take a bigger bite in a single pass) and that the faster speed is for final pass clean up.
I’ve been a professional woodworker my whole adult life. Is it possible I’ve simply been wrong about this the whole time? Now that I think about it, it sort of makes sense (not the faster speed for clean up… that is always going to be wrong). Should I have been using a slower speed when dimensioning rough cut lumber and taking bigger bites? Or is PM just gaslighting?
Replies
Slower feed= more ctuts per inch, finishing. Faster and deeper makes no sense to me and sounds like the formula for bogging down a machine. Mid-plank snipe anyone?
A planer with 2 speeds? Do I look like a Rockefeller?
This is what happens when the marketing department gets involved. The pitch may be trying to say that with more cuts per inch you can take a bigger bite. It could also be coming from the angle that many floor planers are not finish planers in the sense that many of us think of them. The floor planer's serrated metal feed rollers do not produce "ready" furniture parts per se. The final pass "clean up" could refer to "cleaner than" skip planing for instance(???). I'm just rambling trying to make sense of what is probably senseless marketing fodder. This often happens when we try to force sense into a senseless statement. I run slow speed for a better finish via more cuts per inch.
Here is a comparison of the factory manual for a Delta DC-380 and the Grizzly G1021Z. Both are 2 speed 15 inch planers. The instructions seem to be at odds.
I have a Scheppach 3HP planer-thicknesser that has a single feed-speed of 16.4 feet/second and can take single "bites" up to 3mm (nearly 1/8") with decent if not perfect surface resulting even in hard woods. However .....
Taking 3mm bites in one pass puts maximum strain on all the parts, from motor to feed roller belts to knives and their containing block. When the knives are less than perfectly sharp (they are HSS) the workpiece will bog-down with such a massive bite. So I limit the bites to no more than 1mm and often less.
The feed is via rubber rollers rather than a pinned roller so the finish can come out very smooth if I'm careful and don't take big bites or put the piece in the wrong way 'round for the grain rise & fall.
In other words, what makes the difference to the quality of the output surface is: sharp knives, right feed direction and shallow cuts. A faster feed speed could only reduce that quality.
Deeper cuts can be made to dimension timber without care for the surface finish. But the fact is that doing so tends to blunt knives quicker and risks the machine breaking down earlier from an over-strained part. Such parts can be got from Scheppach .... but they are not inexpensive. It's also a fad having to change things like roller bearings or even drive belts half way through a job.
Doing big bites at an even faster feed rate would surely wear the machine parts even faster.
So I'm gentle with mine. The last roller drive belt (often the first thing to show the strains) has lasted 20 years. The planks coming out are always very smooth and needing minimal planing or sanding (a tiny fraction of a millimetre, if any).
And after all, why hurry the planing if doing so only creates more work down the line for the hand plane or sander?
I use the planer-thicknesser to remove bumpy and rough surfaces and to get two flat sides at right angles to each other on the initial rough plank. The tablesaw is then used to dimension the plank to near-right size. (I used to use a bandsaw). The planer-thicknesser can then smooth and finally-dimension the planks with just small bites and very few passes.
It's a mistake, I feel, to use a planer or jointer to dimension lumber from the yard all the way through from very rough to not just smooth and even but the right dimensions. Tablesaw and bandsaw are better for removing large sections of a plank.
Lataxe
I find all of the marketing wives' tales to be soooo interesting...
For me, the key is to take small passes... be it routing or planning. Woodworking is not a timed event; nor are there extra points from the spouse, significant other or a client for it.
I read reviews of individuals extolling the virtues of 3-hp routers - that you can take full-profile molding cut in one pass; that you can use larger bits, take off more material... some of this is just dangerous, as well as being poor advice to a beginner.
Planning is a similar issue, the depth of cut should be to progressively remove variations in the surface material until you have a smooth surface. Generally, I take a hand-plane to remove the outrageous mill-machining stuff off a board, then take 1mm-2mm passes to smooth the board. I know this doesn't sound sexy or goal-directed, but why would I want to push capabilities of a cutter-head - risk getting my expensive lumber caught-up in my expensive planer, while the damn thing is rotating at several thousand rpms?
My recommendation is to take the extra 2 minutes, and run another pass.
I'm way, way past asking my planer to be a finisher. That said, I helical head could come close.
That's what hand plans & drum sanders are for.
Mine has two speeds I believe they are 16 and 24. I keep it on the fast speed all the time. I think the idea is less likely hood of planer marks since its moving faster over the blades.
My suggestion is make your life easier and think of a plane as a thicknessing machine only.
REJr, it is the other way around in terms of speed. With the cutterhead rotating at a fixed RPM the number of cuts per inch goes up with a slower feed rate. Each cut is a radiused "scoop" from the surface, more cuts per inch puts the "scallops" from each cut closer together, making the finished surface smoother.
I have a 3HP helical head jointer/planer and when I edge joint boards I have to remind myself to slow down. The machine will joint no matter how fast I push the lumber through, but the surfaces are far superior when I go slow.
Love my 1-speed, 3 blade planer. I figure if I have a lot to remove, I bought the wrong thickness to start with.
Occasionally, when I edge join pieces and the whole is too wide for the planer I use a router, a couple pipe clamps and 2" bottom cleaning bit to smooth out the varying thicknesses. It's easy and I get to make a mess.
Mikaol
I guess my question wasn't clear enough. With a two-speed planer. which speed is better for rapid stock removal? Fast or slow?
The answer may be counter-intuitive. It's easier for the machine to take a deeper cut at the slower feed rate because the length of the cut (as opposed to the depth of cut) is shorter.
The faster speed may be best suited to lightly skimming in order to sneak up on an exact thickness.
If all this is true (and it seems like it should be), then I am embarrassed to say that I've been dimensioning lumber the hard way for most of my life. I should have been using the slower speed and taking a bigger cut in order to get to my desired thickness in fewer passes.
*Just so It's clear, when I say "dimensioning" I'm referring to thickness only.
A typical kitchen takes 300-400 board feet of 4/4 rough cut lumber that all needs to be milled down to .775", which usually takes all day. If I can get it done faster by using the slower speed (again, counter-intuitive) then I'm surprised at how long it's taken me to figure that out.
"Here is a comparison of the factory manual for a Delta DC-380 and the Grizzly G1021Z. Both are 2 speed 15 inch planers. The instructions seem to be at odds."
This had me checking my manual which states something similar. I wonder if we are running into a matter of semantics here. When I say 'finishing' when talking about planers I am talking about a smoother surface. Maybe the 'finishing' they are talking about in the manual refers to "a final pass" when doing heavy load, large volume milling?
If I had a fancy pants machine with 2 speeds, I would run boards through at both speeds. I would see which removed material faster, and which removed material smoother. I would try it with both softwood, hardwood, and figured wood. I would take note of which did the job best. I would ignore the manual.
Working wood is more fun than theoretically working wood. And manuals can be notoriously bad.
2-speed delta planer owner here. Tried the comparison thing on several types of wood. Never could see or feel much of a difference. I finish everything with a hand plane anyway
I have a DeWalt DW 735 planer. I found that using the slower speed and taking light cuts with sharp blades was the only way to plane very curly maple with excellent results.
In a production shop it all comes down to time and money. Two speed planers will allow you to remove a deeper cut on lower speeds. Work out the time factor per bd. ft. and you have your answer with regards to the thickening challenge. The finish results can play into the equation if you plan to finish right from the planer. Some folks obviously do this. Your challenge is just math. Once again - Time and Money....Good luck....and my best wishes. It's a decision you're going to live with for a while.
@MJ
from my planer manual:
“Generally, low feed rates are used for dimension- ing passes, while higher feed rates are used for finishing passes.”
Does seem counter intuitive I think if you went slow enough it would be true.
I have no doubt it says just what you say it does, and it is probably thinking that on the low feed rate you'll be taking heavy cuts for "dimensioning".. or bulk material removal. The slower feed rate works there because the machine will be less likely to bog down for the same reason I am calling out... more cuts per inch.
I'm saying that my experience shows that a slower feed rate with a fixed cutterhead speed produces a higher quality surface. To me, since the "right" speed is always the slow one I don't see the point of a 2-speed fancypants system.
Its really a moot point anyway. Mine is in the fast speed and I’ve only changed that maybe twice in 20 years.
A planer isn’t a surfacer anyway, oh maybe the first 100 feet’s when the blades are new after you’ve spent tedious hours getting them set to within a thou.
It’s a dimensioning machine and that takes a lot of frustration away, doesn’t it?
A drum sanders, now that’s a surfacer!
That said, if I had 1200 bucks laying around I’d change my 20” planer to helical head in a heartbeat.
This forum post is now archived. Commenting has been disabled