Replies

1. 
   David_A._Brown | Aug 01, 2001 10:57pm | #4

   *
   When I'm making more than 1 identical flat part for a furniture design, I usually make a "perfect" template (pattern) first out of 3/8" Baltic Birch plywood, or in some cases 3/8" aluminum sheet. Then I use a straight pattern bit on my router to trim the final pieces to all match the pattern. I cut them slightly oversize, then stick them to the template (double stick tape works well). If I don't need to trim all around a piece, I'll make a fancier jig that incudes clamps to hold the piece down in it. The bearing of the router bit follows the template cutting the piece flush to it. Your mitered parts, if the same length, sound like a perfect opportunity for such a template/pattern/jig. You'll just have to make the pattern with extreme care, as all your parts will match it in profile.

   If you've got a miter slot in your router table, you could also make a custom miter fence to slide in it that would do two things: Include a stop to limit the length of the piece, and slide the piece past a straight bit at 45 degrees.

   In all cases, the piece needs to be close to it's final shape. It's easier to remove large amounts of material on almost any other tool, then let the router skim the last 1/8 or 1/16th down to the perfect shape.

   Hope that gives you some ideas.

   Dave

1. 
   roland_bills | Jul 30, 2001 12:33am | #1

   *Dave I really appreciate the suggestion but what I am talking about is a jig that indexes the length also.For example if one of the mitered pieces comes of the table saw a 1/64 longer than the other 3 did,for whatever reason,I want a router jig that would correctly index the length of all 4,thus remedying this error,in addition to perfecting the angle,which wouldn't be a perfect 45 off the table saw.With this jig there would be no need for shooting jigs,guillotine trimmers,or rotary sanders.The jig merely perfects what comes off the saw.It doesn't totally replace it of course.It is a trimmer and indexer.I assume the jig would use templates and pattern bits or guide bushings of some sort.Producing a template that merely perfects the angle is the easy part.

1. 
   David_A._Brown | Jul 30, 2001 05:48am | #2

   *Well, you are the best expert on what the problem you need to solve is. I solve my own, and many of my student's problems, but always have the problem right in front of me to contemplate. Sometimes it just takes "knowing" I can figure out a solution, and being patient enough to think about it long enough to come up with the solution.Indexing takes a reference point. On a straight board that simply has both ends cut at 45 degrees, the only real reference points are the ends. So a fence applied to a miter guage, with a sliding and lockable stop built in might serve your purpose. Rockler.com is advertising their precision miter guage, with optional flip-stop fence right now. Try this link: http://www.rockler.com/ecom7/findprod.cfm?&DID=6&sku=5718If such a fence used on a router table won't solve your problem, then I don't understand your problem well enough to help.Dave

1. 
   roland_bills | Jul 30, 2001 09:18am | #3

   *Perhaps you are right a router table is the only way to go.I was thinking along the lines of a dedicated jig because the router table I have is a mickey mouse one.Maybe I should invest in good Bulldog one with an accurate miter gauge slide.I don't have time to build one.If I did it would be like the one Pat Warner has in his 3rd book.I could certainly use the miter gauge to index the piece.And set the fence,a jointer type where second half is adjustable by thousands to plane the miters perfect.Correct?

1. 
   Rickk_ | Aug 05, 2001 07:22pm | #5

   *I've been cutting miters in wood and metal for years and have used all the different ways possible. The miter sled on a table saw will give that machinist accuracy. It's only as accurate as you set it up plus it's a one shot operation. Production picture framing operations use a saw blade for the accuracy. You could rig up the sled to work with a router as well but you would add an extra step which is really not necessary.

2. 
   CStanford_ | Aug 06, 2001 09:09pm | #6

   *Really seems like the wrong tool for the job. Any reason you can't use a more traditional approach? Seems like a lot of teeth gnashing for nothing.