Hi all,
Anybody got any tips on building a butcher block counter top? It wants to be hard maple, 1 3/4" thick. It's 38" wide X 6'8" long, turns 90 degrees and is 25" X 106", I have a 6" joiner, 13" planer and a 16/32 drum sander. I'm thinking I straight line the 8/4 boards, cot my pieces out, join one side, and send the other side through the planer. Glue up with Titebond III and clamp with 3 or 4 cauls. Am I missing anything? Thanks,
Steve
Steve,
If I could design my ideal kitchen, wood countertops would be my first choice. I spend a lot of time doing food prep in the kitchen, and wood would create a pleasant work environment. Linoleum and formica are all I have ever used. They are OK, but wood has a softer feel, Solid surface and granite seem cold to me. (I might be tempted to use a granite counter top for lapping my planes, not good for the domestic tranquility!)
That stated, I would never attempt to make the counter top myself. I could probably do the jointer and planer work. However, that much maple is awfully heavy and bulky to scribe fit.
Do you have experience with this kind of work?
If not, I would suggest a first project. Make a work island. Building a butcher block top of maple say 24" x 48" would give you a feel for the work.
This would not be a "mock up". It would be a useful food prep and serving area. If you put it on large wheels, you could roll it to other areas as well. Include a separate cutting board, perhaps 18" x 24", for the actual food chopping.
The experience of building a smaller work area would help you decide if you want to continue with the large counter or contact a local counter shop.
If you do decide to go ahead yourself, by the time you are through, you will be able to change and sharpen your jointer and planer knives like a GI can field strip his rifle.
Ken
Hey Ken,
I did one of these once before. I think it was right after the Civil War. I had a 10" contractor's saw, a few clamps, a piece of threaded rod, a fairly dull block plane and youth. It actually came out pretty good, all things considered. Planing a hard maple top with a dull block plane was pretty exciting.
Anyway, this is a different lifetime and I have a joiner, planer, good clamps, real glue, Forest blades and most importantly, a Tormek T-7. I have purchased a quantity of 8/4 hard maple and I'm going to make this thing myself. My planer blades are in pretty good shape, they have not been turned to the alternate sides and I have two new blades I can use if I need them. I've restrained myself from buying the black HSS wheel and the planer blade jig. I know it's only a matter of time. People keep asking me why I don't buy the tops pre-made and just install them. I think we both know the answer to that. When I see what can be done with Japanese hand planes, I think the next one I make will be all done by hand. Another reason why the Tormek is so important. Woodworking, my brother, is good for the soul.
Steve
Hi Steve,
If you have some nice looking boards and aim to expose their faces you can side join the boards, the top will be unstable as the wood moves with moisture and temperature and this setting will generate the largest movement so you will have to make sure that the mounting to the lower part of the counter would allow for that movement. Most likely the boards are larger than 6" and probably at that length (~7') would be unsafe and hard to hold the boards to use the jointer, I you use a stand would not be very effective as the extension cannot replace an extended infeed table. In my case when I prepared the 8' wood for my workbench I preferred to joint using hand planes, it takes a bit longer but you are in most of the control you need and after that I used the true face and side as references and sent the wood through planner. Also if the boards are wider than 6" cutting it to the width of the jointer is a waste of wood and wood features in my opinion, I would just plane them by hand for the reference face and then send it through the planer.
If you aim for stability then I suggest ripping the wood to the thickness of the top and join the faces of the wood together, that will give you both stability and strength and depending on the wood it is very possible to have a more uniform grain pattern.
Whatever method you choose I would also suggest using splines to aid the alignment of the top surface and add strength the to joined surfaces. When you clamp do not rush, address one joining only at a time, adding too many boards at once to be clamped would make it very hard to align and clamp the boards in time before the glue starts being to tacky or cured, use as many heavy clamps as possible one every foot if possible. The heavy clamping is not for the force, if the surfaces of the wood are properly prepared you don;t need tons of pressure for clamping, it is for the surface of the clamping provided. Also you will want to arrange the clamps in alternating directions.
Make sure you mark the boards for the grain direction before you glue them so you keep the grain running in the same direction to help you with final planning of the tops, I don;t have a drum sander but even if I would, I would still prefer to plane the wood than to sand it but it is your choice there.
I hope this helps.
Ionut
Steve,
Based on your most recent post, I change my hesitation. Go for it!
Ken
I'm goin' for it, Dude. Thanks,
Steve
Steve,
Since we are lean on youth, I would suggest being very sharp with the block plane!
Ken
ps Chris Schwarz's Plane book and Brian Burns, Double Bevel book might be useful to you at this time. I recommend both.
ps, Steve,
Don't sell you Civil War era block plane. A fellow named Leonard Bailey has been pushing metal planes. It's just a fad. Stick with the real wooden planes.
Ken
Ken,
I think that Bailey guy gave up on the metal planes and started making something called Bristol Cream, whatever that is. Wood planes are the best. What does he know anyway?
The following is for Ionut, Ken S. and anybody else who might care:
I have about 50 b' of 8/4 X 6" thru 9" X 9' and 10', all is S2S. I plan to straightline one side, flip it and rip 2" pieces. I will run the original S2S planed edge thru the planer once more to to clean it up, flip that and plane the other side. I'll glue up the planed faces with Titebond Delay glue at about 12" centers with Jet bar clamps and about 3 or 4 cauls in 80". I can't figure out if I should let the glue dry overnight or try to scrape when the glue is just set, in about an hour or so. I will run three 13" wide X 10' pieces thru the planer, both sides and then thru the drum sander, maybe just one side. I don't know what grit on the sander, but I'm guessing maybe 120 and 220. I will spray about 5 coats of Enduro Var, sanding between coats with Mirka 600 grit sponge pads and 1000 grit synthetic steel wool. I have to decide on the edge treatment, but it will be minimal. Did I forget anything?
Steve
Hi Steve,
I never found S2S that has actually true sides, they are parallel but not true. Also when you rip them you have expect bows and twists, the wood is dried in that form so as soon as you rip it the tension distribution gets changed. At the end of the day after ripping and before doing any thickness planning you have to end with a true side and an true edge at 90 degrees of each other. You can use them then as a reference to prepare the other side and edge with the planner. If you don't have those two references nothing will be straight. You can laminate the pieces like that by forcing the boards with the clamps but there at least two major problems, it will be hard to properly align the wood under tension and if you succeed it may still slide slowly while clamped , second the lamination may fail in time and lastly the laminated assembly has will most likely end with no true face or edge and this will get propagated with each lamination. Of course you can take it to the drum sander but not having a reference surface the sander will copy the opposite surface just like a planner.
Whether is done by hand or by jointer after ripping I would true a side and an edge if they are not true and start from there. But again that's the way I work.
It is easier to clean the glue when is set , depending on the temperature and the glue that can start from 20min to an hour.
I never used Enduro Var, if it is a varnish and you have a good quality spraying machine and a very good hand, then you can probably spray it, I would brush it, it is much easier and controllable at least for me. Make sure it contains UV inhibitors if the counter is supposed to be in the sun, I would use a exterior grade polyurethane varnish. I usually sand between coats with 320-400,. The 600 grit and up should be used to finish the finish (including polishing or hand rubbing s desired).
Ionut
Ionut,
After reading your post, I feel more apprehensive then ever. Maybe that's a good thing. I guess the first thing I need to understand is what you actually mean by "true". If the S2S surfaces are parallel, why are they not true? Then, if you do true one side with hand planes, would you start with a foreplane and then a jointer plane and would you take it to a smother plane, or just the foreplane and jointer plane, not worrying about the smother plane since that may close the grain and be counterproductive as a gluing surface? And, if you use a power jointer, why would you joint a side and an edge? I understand the side because the is actually the face that gets glued, but the unglued or exposed face can be planed and sanded after assembly, right? Or are you saying that you would joint one edge as a reference and then flip that edge and run it thru the thickness planer in order to true up those two faces so that after assembly all the exposed faces are true and therefore easier to plane flat? Finally, my power jointer is only 4' long. Will I have a problem jointing one side of a 10' board on a jointer that is only 4' long, or is it simply a matter of keeping even pressure on the outfeed side during the jointing process and using support rollers on both sides of the machine to control the 10' length?
As far as the finish, I have sucessfully sprayed Enduro Var in the past. It is a water based product made by General Finishes and it sprays nicely and lays very flat. I do have a good gun and the right compressor. Thank you for your feedback, all extremely helpful. Next time I'm in Canada, I'll buy you lunch.
Steve
I have done a couple of 10" long maple tops & started by jointing the edge on my 6" jointer (66" long) & I did use roller stands but kept the height below the in or out feed table (only used to take the weight after complete pass)
The client wanted 2 1/2" finished thickness so this allowed me to rip all the material over size orientating the grain so that the expansion occurs in the thickness not the width then I sticker it over night to acclimatize.
Then I jointed 1 edge of each piece & then I ripped the opposing side using feather boards. ( I would have used a glue line rip blade but they say not to be used for 1" & over wood)
If the boards were good & strait I would run the boards tipped edge over the jointer.
I used biscuits to help align during glue-up & laminate planks no wider then my planer (13") then plane the blanks, then glue the planed blanks together using biscuits to help align during glue-up then you only need to do hand plane the seems.
I used Tide bond III & Tung oil, I did not want any film finish because they were going to use it as cutting board & it becomes a mess & is harder to re-finish later.
During glue up the boards are not perfectly straight to each other but it takes so little force to bring the boards together that it does not pose a problem at the glue line.
It has worked for me & has been in place for 5 years now with no problem.
Dan
Dan,
Who's blade was it that said not to glue line rip material over 1" ? Are you using the term "glue line" and "straightline" rip interchangeably? Also, do you thing you would have had allignment problems without the biscuits? Thanks,
Steve
Hi Steve
I have the Freud Glue Line Rip Blade Glue Line Rip Blades (http://glue%20line%20rip%20blades)
• Produces extremely smooth glue line rips in hard and soft wood from 1/8" to 1" thick
I think I tried it with thicker material & it makes a horrible noise but now I am not sue, I think I will try it again because I can't remember.
do you thing you would have had alignment problems without the biscuits?
I never used biscuits years ago but It can help.
When I worked in a commercial shop we just lined up 1 end & had some one on the other end (usually me) & lifted or tweaked the boards as necessary to aline the top & clamped as you go but this would be very difficult by your self.
The guy I worked for was amazing & what he could do but never used jigs or many other helpers that you see now in wood working.
He could be called a raw woodworker
Got it. Thanks, Dan.
Steve
I see my link to Freud did not work.
Try again.
http://www.freud.ca/English/Pages/Blades/Industrial/Ripping/Ripping2.html (http://www.freud.ca/English/Pages/Blades/Industrial/Ripping/Ripping2.html)
That one worked.
Has any one out there had any experience with glue line rip blades?
If so can you let us know what brand & how well they worked & is there a thickness barrier.
Dan
Hi Steve,
I am sorry for confusion I've created, in a previous post I used the term face and that created a different confusion so this time because you brought up the S2S term which we both know means surfaced two sides, I refered to the face as being the side, the edge is the edge, I don't know how to call it better. True means straight and 90 degrees. The side surfaces (faces) may be parallel as they come from the lumber supplier, because that's what a planner does, copies one side or face on the opposite side and that includes the defects as well, usually twists and bows. The milling process of the wood as I have learned it requires you, regardless how you do it, to true two adjacent surfaces at first and they will be used after that as reference surfaces to true the other ones so you end with perfectly straight consistent thick lumber that can be used in building furniture or cabinet making.
When it comes to machines the jointer will allow you to true one side and one edge and also make the edge at 90 degrees (or whatever angle you want) from the side then you rip the wood with whatever tools you have for example a table saw at the desired width and run the wood through the planer where the initial trued face is used as a reference (facing down in the planner) to bring the lumber at the desired thickness, you have now your piece of wood prepared for building whatever you want to build, and you can count on it as being straight and having a consistent width and thickness.
You can do this milling process with hand planes and that of course takes a bit more time. When I used my jointer for the 8' (close to 9' before cutting them at length) I didn't like it from two reasons, safety first and second I ended wasting wood as my roller stand could not replace an extended infeed table in order to provide proper reference for the wood, more precisely in a case of a bow for example the end of the wood was climbing over the stand as I was feeding it resulting in an cut following the bow at the opposite end where the cutting was actually happening. More than that after the end passed the stand it fell down on the infeed table changing again the cutting action. I am not much of a machine guy, so I simply did that with my handplanes.
When is about what planes to use it is an entire "barbology" that I should avoid. If the wood needs a lot of work on the face I start with a scrub plane, if the defects are mild I use a 5-1/2 and go across the wood in both diagonals, when I removed the defects I use a jointer plane that leaves me with the wood as I want it for each construction. Sometimes I replace the 5-1/2 with a jack plane. I leave the smoother or smoothing plane for the end after the piece has been assembled for cleanup and sometimes for the final step before the finishing, For the edge I start with the 5-1/2 or a Jack and end with my jointer plane.
About the finish take it more as a personal preference of mine, the water based varnishes are easier to spray, I prefer the oil based for durability.
If you come here let me know it would be nice to meet and play with some wood if you like, about the lunch? you'll pay mine and I'll pay yours :) I am not trying to help you if I can for any material reasons.
Ionut
Ionut,
I'm just going to go for it. I'll let you know how it goes. Thanks for the feedback. I like talking to someone who has been doing this for over a hundred years.
What kind of planes do you like? Japanese look like fun but a little fussy in the adjustment. Lie-Nielsen cost $510 for the jointing plane with the corrugated sole. I'd have to get a job at Wal Mart to afford that kind tool. Whata ya think?
Steve
I like the Veritas ones, they are a great quality/price choice and sometimes they come with real ingenious improvements to the old models. The Japanese ones are great but the ones made by some great masters, really good ones may get as expensive as the premium metal ones, the more affordable ones need work before use, especially on the sole. I live in a pretty wet area I also have to "listen" at what the wood says in case of atmospheric changes so I kind of prefer the metal ones, even though they have their own rusting issues in the same conditions, but with a bit of oiled attention that problem disappears. You can make your own wooden ones if you want, it is really not so hard, David Fink's "Making and Matsering Wood Planes" is a great source for that, the Hock blades are really good quality and if you pay the required attention to the tricks presented in the book you cane really end in owning a plane that can compete with any premium plane. I have made the one presented in the book and it really ended to be a great and reliable wood plane, I use it more for smoothing. And on the top of everything it is not only cheaper but it also gives you the satisfaction of being then one who built it.
Ionut
"What kind of planes do you like? Japanese look like fun but a little fussy in the adjustment. Lie-Nielsen cost $510 for the jointing plane with the corrugated sole. I'd have to get a job at Wal Mart to afford that kind tool. Whata ya think?
Steve"
Steve,
For $510 planes, I would suggest you send your resumé to Goldman Sachs instead of Wal-Mart.
My three main bench planes are 1909 vintage Bedrocks. They are a lucky find from when I was young and had no idea of what they are. I am the second owner.
In modern planes, being a traditionalist, I generally favor the Lie-Nielsens. However, Lee Valley makes an intriguing looking bevel up jointer with a custom designed fence for it. The price for the plane is $275. Fence is $38. It is available with different blades. It looks like it might be just the ticket for your butcher block job.
Ken
ps One nice thing about this kind of a job is that you get to enjoy it every day. That's a lot of pleasure in the results of your labor.
Does it make sense to buy the Veritas bevel up jointer by itself without the jack and smoother? I mean, if I don't start on this top with the jack, go on to the jointer and then the smoother, is it going to be like having a car with one gear? Can I actually make up for the lack of the full contingent of planes? Is it like starting sanding with only 220, when in reality you really need to start with 80 and 120 and so on working up the ladder with grits. I could write a book on what I don't know. I'm really glad you guys are out there. Thanks for all your help.
Steve
Hey Steve, I would write an entire encyclopaedia about things I don't know, luckily nobody asks me to do it.
Don't rush with the planes, a good car with one gear would be the Jack plane, and if you get a couple of blades for different bevels that car would allow you to finish counter top race. The jack is long enough to do a pretty good jointing job, it is really good to flatten and true the stock, you can also do scrubbing jobs with it , and if your top has no isolated areas that need very local attention a 38-50 degrees angle blade will make a good job smoothing. It is not that great to act as a block plane but is indispensable for planning the ends of the boards on a shooting board to mention few of the things you can do with it. If you get the low angle plane changing the blades and adjusting will be very easy. You will be able to make the whole top with it. You will add the other ones in time as you find you really need them, that will give you a chance to see how you like it and maybe you will start to make one yourself for a specific job. Really take your time with them, woodworking doesn't mean you have to have all the tools that have been invented over hundreds of years.
Ionut
Steve,
Do you presently have any planes?
If not, you might consider building a kit as needed.
If you already do have some planes, the question becomes what would be a strategic upgrade in the areas most beneficial.
In my case, although the Lie-Nielsens and Veritas planes look tempting, most would be nicer duplicates (or near duplicates functionally) of what I already have.
Be sure to read the recent article in Fine Woodworking by Chris Becksvoort about the bevel up jack plane.
Ken
So yeah, I have a Stanley block plane. That's it. I'm just now getting into planes and sharpening, for real. I have some old Arkansas oil stones from WW I but I'm going to get the Veritas jack plane on the advice of Ionut and Ken S. My question now is not so much about truing the face and edge as it is about keeping all pieces of my top the same size, namely 1 3/4 X 1 3/4 finished. I start with 2 X 2 and plane to 1 3/4 but since each board is different in terms of bow, etc. when I true up, each board is different by as much as 1/2". How to maintain consistancy?
Steve
Oh yeah, BTW, A2 or O1 on that Veritas plane iron?
Hi Steve
There was some very good info on this topic I read here I will have a look for it
It may have been Ionut with very good info on A2 or O1
I am not able to find the post here but here is a link to some good information on A2 vs O1 Tool Steel.
http://thewoodwhisperer.com/a2-vs-o1-tool-steel/ (http://thewoodwhisperer.com/a2-vs-o1-tool-steel/)
Hope this helps
Dan
Thanks Dan,
Sounds like a toss up. My gut says to go with O1.
Steve
Personally, I would go with A2. I presume that you will use your tormek for sharpening. I'd rather have the longer lasting edge. Now if you were going to sharpen with bench stones, I would consider the O2.
All of my planes are ancient, so for me it is a moot point, but if I was buying a new one, I would get A2.
Brett
I would go with A2 my self because the edge will last longer but that's just my opinion.
I think, to me, being the sharpest possible is what I'm looking for. A little extra sharpening is not that big a deal with the Tormek, if that's really what it amounts to.
Steve
Yes it isn't a big deal now that we have a Tormek.
Another plus if you are looking a Veritas is the fact that the blade is thicker then many others.
I would lean, like Steve, in the direction of the O1. Plan to do minor touch ups more frequently rather than sharpen.
Eventually, Steve, you will probably have both blades (and more!) for the low angle jack plane.
Do keep us posted both with the project and the plane.
Good luck.
Ken
Hi Ken,
I bought enough 8/4 maple to make my counter tops. I cut up one board and took the rest back. The material was beyond the scope of my equipment. The table saw bogged down, the jointer was OK but the bed is only 4', 6' or even 7' would have been better. The planer is a 13" Delta, which is OK. For that kind of material, you really need a 3 hp table saw. Plus, I wanted to net 1 3/4" out of the 8/4 boards and as Ionut said, the internal pressure dynamics change as you rip a board. As such, some 8/4 boards don't yield an 1 3/"4 finished piece after jointing and planing because of bowing. That said, I bought finished blanks from Woodcraft for the same price as the S2S material cost. So, no jointing, no planing, no sanding or finishing. Plus, I can assemble on site which saves me from carrying full pieces to the site. One top is 38 X 80. That would have weighed about 170 lbs. or more assembled. Could be done, but not a lot of fun.
I will have to joint to tops, so I bought the Veritas bevel up jointer with O1 steel and with the edge guide. I'll let you know how that works. If it doesn't work out, I can always blame you since it was your suggestion. How's that sound?
Steve
Steve,
As Curly said in "City Slickers", "Day ain't over yet." You made a valiant attempt, and learned some things.
You will be a better woodworker for the experience.
Keep us posted on your progress, and what you think of the Veritas bevel up jointer. This might be a good time to invest in a good four foot straightedge. Useful now and useful later, too.
"Fortune favors the brave"
Ken
Hi Steve,
There was some developing here while I wasn't able to connect the last days.
About steel type for the plane blades, if I would need now to go and get a new blade for my planes I would most likely get an O1 one, it is said, I never verified the statement as I don't have the needed tools, that O1 steel may allow a finer crystalline structure which allows for a sharper cutting edge. Even though I don't have the tools to verify it, I can feel the difference when cutting wood, the feel, the sound of the cut and the look of the wood after being planned are in favour of the O1. Yes you may have to sharpen it a bit more frequent but with Tormek that is not an issue and for fine and precise work I would go with O1. For hogging wood I would still consider the A2. If you pay attention on how your tool cuts you can quickly take the blade out and with just some honing on the leather wheel you can restore it quickly to the initial cutting state. Of course if there are no nicks or other defects on the cutting edge, a 10x or 20x magnifier glass can help you to asses the state.
I am sorry you had to take that avenue with your counter top, first a commercial table saw is not appropriate to rip hard maple in that thickness and length. The table saw is one of the most dangerous and un-predictable tools to use in my opinion, I would only have use for it for trimmings and that would not justify the money spend and the space used for the machine that's why I don't have one and I will never do. An industrial/large production quality table saw is not the subject for this. Ripping of that wood on table saw is very hard on the blade, thaw should be done in multiple passes. Also the tension in the wood may lead to dangerous kickbacks during the process so you would have to be in the opposite corner of your house when doing that. A much better option for that would be to sell the table saw for a band saw. You can rip as much as you want on that machine all kinds of woods in all kinds of states and as thick as the machine will allow you. It is a much more reliable tool. You would argue that the cut would need to be cleaned and I am telling you that cleanup is less than minimal and the time together with the planning of cut surface is far less than mocking around a table saw to get the results you want. To give you an example how the wood personality influences you work, while I was ripping my maple for my workbench top, one of the boards had so much tension build up that when the was 6 inches away from the end of the cut the wood did split violently. I have ended there with about 1/2" bow for the entire board so I decided to use it for the leg construction as taking all that bow out would have left me with less thickness than I needed. Imagine that happening on a table saw.
Some people may argue but I know what I went through, the jointer effectiveness decreases drastically with the length of the board in comparison with the length of the table. Ideally the in-feed table would have to be as long as the board being planed, that would allow the wood to rest on the entire length stable for the cut, leading to minimal wood removal and perfect results, but something like that is far from our budgets, space and goals. An option would be to build a wooden extension but that has it's own critical issues to be addressed, a stand would be the next option but you may end with slicing wood until you may not be able to use it for what you want without getting a straight true surface, and the last option would be to use it as it is which I doubt would give you the desired results in case of wild woods. You could use a planner but without a true reference the planner just copies the defects from one side to the other. That is why we have our hand planes that will allows use to do the best job on wood no machine can do and that is why I have trued my boards by hand.
Now the already made butcher blocks have their own issues, the reason why you paid as much as or as less as the S2S is because their quality is far from the quality obtained by making them yourself. You may be lucky and may have got blocks laminated from full length wood ( as long as the butcher block is) but I really doubt that, most of them are made using end finger joined wood, more than that there is no attention paid to the way the grain is oriented and the wood pieces are coming from very different parts of the tree which will lead in a not very stable block. Considering the fact that they will end in the kitchen where moist may be an issue I would suggest to add some extra finish coats and definitely coat it on the underside as well.
Ionut
Steve,
Two thoughts:
A2 or O1? For an extra $34.50, you can order one of each with your plane. Keep them both sharp and see which you prefer. Eventually you can grind a secondary bevel on one to another angle if you want.
With the maple board you started to cut: Is it large enough to be made into a cutting board? My cutting board is 18" x 24". I use it almost every day in food prep. It's a nice one and I like it. I would like it more if I had made it myself. It would be a nice use for your maple.
Your jointer should have no problem with the shorter length boards. They wouldn't be such a hassle to cut to size. (Have you considered a thin kerf ripping blade or using a bandsaw?)
Final thickness could be whatever happens.
Ken
Hi Ionut.
I think the best thing that happened to me is finding out what the limits are of my equipment. A hard maple butcher block counter top is, practically speaking, beyond the scope of my equipment. I do have an 18" bandsaw, but still, given the same choices, knowing what I know now, I would opt to assemble kitchen counter tops from pre-finished blanks. I feel good about that decision when all things are considered.
As I told Ken, I have ordered the Veritas low angle, bevel up jointer plane with the edge guide and O1 steel. If the O1 becomes problematic, I will experiment with the A2.
I think the main point is, if you want a solid maple counter top to be a net of 1 3/4", you will most likely have to start with larger material than 8/4. This is the main thing that I did not realize. It's good to know that for the future. Anyone else who tries making a solid wood top should be aware of that fact. Also, it should be said that it is not really a problem using a 4' jointer to mill 10' material as long as you have rollers for support at the infeed and outfeed sides. Yes, a larger bed would be more convenient, but not absolutely necessary, as I discovered. The same for the thickness planer. With good support, milling 10' material is not really a problem. The main thing is that if you are not a "production shop", making a large solid wood kitchen counter top is not really appropriate, in my opinion. Smaller stuff, yes, but anything as large as what I was attempting is not really sensible. Thanks again for your input,
Steve
Ken,
I have a Forrest blade with the stabilizing disc on my table saw now and I have an 18" band saw. I have tried the thin kerf blades and I don't really care for them. I just think that with the size and weight of the material I was working with, going with pre-assembles pieces was the right choice. The one board I did rip, I'll use for edge banding in a couple locations on this top.
For whatever reason, I've gotten myself convinced that O1 is the way I want to go. I'm guessing I will eventually try the A2, but for now, I will see how it goes with the O1.
I'll let you know, thanks.
Steve
Hi Steve,
Don't get me wrong, your choice is your choice and I respect it, agreeing with your choice is a bit of a different story. Even though I respect your choice I still feel disappointed, even though is not my business, because this is a result of 40 posts thread in which different people tried to help you as much as possible with all the information needed for you to get the job done, in my case I am just wondering if I wasn't more confusing than helping considering the extra questions you had.
Anyways to get back to the points, it is good to try both blade types as that's the only way you may find out what you like and it is better for you. I can't be too objective as most of my blades are A2.
In my opinion any piece of wood that gets inside your shop can be worked if the size of it allows you to take it in. Of course we don't have production shops but also this table top was not a production shop job, it would have been if you would have had to build 20 of them in a week. In my previous posts I tried to show my approach in making the counter top, which doesn't have to be the best way, in my case I see it as the best way to deliver to highest quality which also has nothing to do with the speed. Of course you can use the jointer, if you consider its mechanics and its limitations, you can use the 4' table to start milling the wood and you can spend as much time as you want to find the best solution to use the jointer. For me it was more practical to get to my hand planes and prepare the references by hand as I got faster in doing that than to invent all kinds of helpers for the jointer. You could just skip the jointer all together if you wanted and just use the planner and end with not perfectly true boards but boards that you can still laminate with all the tension in the wood.
You actually can build a 6" thick top of 4x4 lumber if you want. If your remember, in one of my first posts, I presented to ways to laminate the top, side lamination or edge lamination, depending on what you try to achieve. My workbench top is 3" thick made from 8x4 lumber and it is a side lamination which is the best stability and strength option.
Ionut
Steve,
This post goes far beyond the usual in several ways. It shows how little we really know about each other. However, it also shows how we all try to offer good advice in good faith.
For what it's worth, I admire you for attempting such a large project. I know it is frustrating that things did not work out the way you had planned. All is not lost. You have some new hard won knowledge. You also have the woodworking "bug". Those two can be a powerful combination for forward motion.
I predict you will use this temporary setback as a building block for future projects. I hope you prove me right.
Hang in there, compadre.
Ken
ps I bought my century old Bedrocks from a carpenter in his eighties (in 1972). He told me he had hollow ground the blades, and that he could touch up the sharpness with a file. I'll bet he would have swapped those blades in a nanosecond for either O1 or A2.
I spent an hour yesterday sharpening my 90's vintage Stanley block plane. Took the back to 8000 and used the Tormek Japanese 4000 on the bevel. The idea was to plane the end grain side of the maple top I'm making in order to turn 90 degrees with another piece of the counter top, if that makes any sense. I got the plane sharp and square. I was able to get some thin shavings by keeping the throat tight and the blade barely on the wood, but I came away thinking that the block plane on hard maple end grain was not the appropriate tool. In the end, I'm thinking the best thing to do is use the router with a straight edge guide and belt sand to finish it up. Frankly, I was hoping a Tormek sharp block plane was going to be a magic bullet, but it didn't work that way. I wonder if I had some Hock 01 iron in that block plane, or maybe a low angle block plane with Hock steel in it, would I have had a different experience. My real goal here is to get away from power tools as much as possible. I feel like I started out in motor boats but now that I have had a glimpse of the true nature of woodworking, I want to be in a sail boat. BTW, thanks to Ken S. and Ionut, I have purchased the Veritas bevel up jointer, jack and smoother planes. Again, all in pursuit of woodworking purity. Thanks guys, you have been an inspiration.
Steve
Hi Steve,
First I hope you didn't have to spend an hour sharpening only on the Tormek, unless if that hour included the flattening by hand of the blade as well. Using Tormek for the bevel should be a very short session.
About the end grain of the counter top, I am afraid you were trying to tickle an elephant with a hair thread. The block plane is a bit too small for that operation considering the surface of the end grain and the size of the block plane. You should have used at least the jack plane, it is heftier, if allows you to hold it easier and apply more force with your body as the end grain requires much more effort to plane and it is also much harder on the blade so when you have a lot of end grain to plane you will have to make sure you always use a very sharp blade even if you would have to sharpen it a bit more often. Also the surface of the plane would gain a much straighter edge and if your butcher block is less than 2" 3/8 you can cover the entire surface in one pass. The block plane is for smaller surfaces where using a larger plane makes the work very awkward. In my case I have a principle, use the largest plane possible for the job. If the idea in case with the end grain is to join that edge I would also go and use the jointer. So for all the end grain work make sure you have a dedicated blade that is used only for this kind of work regardless the side of the work. The bevel angle should be not larger than 25 which in combination with the 12 degrees bed angle would make a 37 degrees attach angle. This leads to the best combination in my case. For end grain work the blade should be an A2 blade as it is able to take more beating and it has to be extremely sharp all the times to give you good results. Use the largest plane for the job, in your case at least the jack plane. If you want to reference the plane side to something straight you can only use the jack as the sides of the plane are square to the sole. The jointer doe not have square sides to the sole. The mouth opening doesn't matter much when you deal with end grain so leave it opened enough to allow the shavings to go through, the tearing on the end grain is not depending on the mouth opening. The tearing on the end grain happens when the blade is not sharp enough and presses the wood grain instead of cutting it. On the long grain tearing is happening for the same reason but with different mechanics, the blade instead of cutting the wood is lifting it, but closing the mouth as much as possible would break the wood sooner and would reduce the tearing. And whenever you see marks on the wood engrain created by minor nicks in the blade, or if it is much harder to push, don't continue, get the blade out and put a new sharp edge on it. Also when you plane try to skew the plane, not too much to not lose support, just enough to make the job easier. For very hard endgrain jobs sometimes I use to wet the endgrain with mineral spirit which also aids a bit the process.
You could also go with the router and sander as you said but you will never get to same result and cannot rely on the edge for a glue line or jointed surface. The sander would mess all the good work of the router with a straight edge. If that your path you are thinking to take use just the router with a good quality and sharp spiral bit of at least 1/2" diameter.
Motorized woodworking is more of a machine operating and jig making art, I also prefer to stay away from the machines as much as possible. They are very useful in numerous repetitive operations like production shops but that is pretty much it. It is unbelievable how many and beautiful things you can build with just few hand tools, some wood and just two hands.
I hope this helps.
Ionut
Thanks Ionut, that does help a lot. What about the issue of the steel? Is it fair to say that the edge on a 15 year old $40 Stanley block plane iron will never do as good a job as a Lie-Nielsen, Hock, Veritas or a Japanese iron? I have a feeling that the better the iron with a tighter molelecular steel grain pattern will give a better edge as well as stay sharper longer even if it's 01 steel. What's your take?
Steve
Hi Steve,
I couldn't say, 15 years is not that old and I think Stanley was already far behind the tools quality they made many years ago, but I can't really tell, I have seen old tools that are working so well it is hard for the today's premiums to be as good, but I also seen the opposite most of the time. The performance of the blade and the sharpness of the blade is in strict correlation with the type of steel more with the chemical composition, the way it has been forged and the strict working temperatures. The temperatures are critical in obtaining the best crystalline steel composition and when you add on top different other ferrous or non ferrous components added to create different alloys for different purposes, it makes the whole thing much more complicated I am not a metallurgist but this is what I have learned.
I can tell you one thing, you can't go wrong with any of the ones you listed. If it is a Japanese one make sure is not made by a large commercial company, the real good quality ones are made by small shops or masters. If you suspect the steel as being the problem of the block plane, the cause of that plane is not lost, there are replacement options from Veritas and Hock and maybe Lie-Nielsen too, with good quality blades.
Ionut
Hi Ionut,
Well,I've got a decision to make. My gut tells me to try a Japanese wooden plane. Yesterday I got the Japan Woodworker catalog in the mail and they have some interesting wood planes I'd like to try. The top of the line ones are over $500. Too rich for me. They do have some in the $175 range I might consider. Ron Hock makes a kit for about $90 that also looks intererting. I know you aren't crazy about wooden planes, but do you think a $90 wood Hock plane kit would br comparable to a $175 Japanese wooden plane, or is that just an impossible question to answer? Do you think Ron Hock's steel is as good as he says it is? Thanks,
Steve
Hi Steve,
There are a couple of reasons why I am not crazy about the wooden planes, first the wood moves with environment changes and where I live with all this moisture in the air that may become a problem, which of course it can be solve by periodically maintaining them. This may not necessarily be an issue in drier climates. A second reason which applies mostly to the Japanese ones is the size/weight of them, the Japanese ones that look like the ones sold by Japanese woodworker are not really made for hard woods even though the blades and the bed angles are, from what I know the Japanese woodworkers were more oriented in working softer woods so that particular shape for harder woods may be a bit harder to use. A wooden plane will never be as heavy as a metal one and the extra weight aids a lot when planning, you do not have to apply lots of downwards pressure which leads to a more precise work and control. An European style wooden plane may be easier to use because of the handles and it will have more weight.
It may sound like cutting your wings off but is not really like that, take it as my opinion which actually is and not necessarily like something you need to do. You have already the required range of planes, that will allow you to do all kinds of work, I am not referring here to the speciality planes which are a totally different chapter. Adjusting the wooden planes is a bit tricky but easy to learn and not a problem to master in pretty short time. They all need maintenance over time, more than the metal ones if the amount of care is the same. The Japanese ones are very good but I find them uncomfortable and light to use in heavy work. The kit Hock makes looks OK, I never tried one, but for that money I would buy his blade, the "Making & Mastering of Wood Planes" by David Finck book and a good piece of hard maple or any suitable hardwood with uniform grain and learn to make one myself. Which is actually what I have done and I ended with a great plane. It is a good exercise, and more than that the book contains lots of great general woodworking information that could help with other projects, and on the top of all, when you will have the need for a specific plane for a very specific job, you will not have to search the internet for days and squeeze your brain for an answer, you just get at you workbench and make one because you already have all the information and know how to do it. That was my approach about the wooden planes.
The Hock blades are good, I have an older one which was not flat as it should be, I had to work it but it wasn't bad, Today he may put more effort in flattening them closer to what they should be. It gets a great edge when sharpened and the cut left on the wood is one of the finest ones.
Ionut
Steve, I included at the link below a picture of the one I've made so maybe you'll get inspired.
http://cid-bc168f3568163031.photos.live.com/self.aspx/Wooden%20plane/^_DSC0978.jpg (http://cid-bc168f3568163031.photos.live.com/self.aspx/Wooden%20plane/%5E_DSC0978.jpg)
Ionut
Hi Ionut,
Let me tell you something, I am way more than inspired, the quality of your work is overwhelming. I'm going to go out today and buy Finck's book. I do hear what you're saying being possibly a little too light, as I told you, I recently bought the Veritas jointing plane which definately has some heft to it. But the look of that plane you built makes me just want to have one, even if it is a little light for some work. I'm telling you, if you lived a little closer, I be camping on your door step for some lessons. Seriously, great work. A couple questions, what steel did you use on the plane, how long is it, and what's the wood. Also, the angled dovetails on that display...fantastic. You are truly an artist, my friend! Thanks as always for all your feedback and the great images. Did you do the photographic work? If so, do you have any close up work of the plane and the dovetails?
Steve
Steve,
I just read Chris Schwarz's blog on the Popular Woodworking site. Just for possible future reference, there is a guy making replacement handles for the Lee Valley bevel up planes. some people like the feel of the LV plane handles, some don't. Hopefully you will. LV certainly makes some fine and innovative planes. I hope you enjoy yours. Keep us posted.
Ken
Thank you Steve. I believe though what you said is a bit too much.
I am not sure if I am in position to give lessons but if I would be closer you would be more than welcome to come and see how I do things when scratching the woodworking spot on my brain.
The blade is a Hock blade 1" ½ or 1" ¾, I don't remember exactly and the plane I think is about 10 11 inch long, is the one presented as an example in that book. The final shaping was my decision though. And if I would build another one I may probably leave something in the front of the plane to help with a better grip.
The dovetails are normal dovetails not angled ones, the wide lenses I've used made them look like angled. I will have to take some other pictures for more close-up but if I do I believe I will send them privately as I don't believe this servers much the sharpening part of the things.
Thanks,
Ionut
Hi Ken,
I read Chris Schwatz's blod and reviewed his images. Those totes look good, but I haven't used the jointer plane hardly at all yet, so I'm not really sure if I would like to have one of those or not. Also, it sounded to me like they may not be commercially available just yet. Do you know? At any rate, thanks for thinking about me and I'll let you know how the bevel up planes work out. I'm optimistic at this point. BTW, based on your advice, I have applied to Red Rocks Community College which is about an hour from me here in Fort Collins. They offer a Certificate Program in Fine Woodworking as well as a Luthier Program. That would be Fall 2011 if I get accepted. I'll let you know. Thanks again,
Steve
Hi Ionut,
You still have my email I think, I'd be happy to have you send me all the images you care to send. Do you have a Nikon D700? I have the D90. I'm not sure how they compare. Good to know that you're using Hock steel. I sent for that book, so as soon as I get it, I'm going to make a plane. What wood did you use? Was it hard to make? Not that I'm rushing right out there, but where in Canada do you live, are you in or near BC? I sort of surmised that based on your humidity comments. I don't really think that Jeff wants to restrict the site to just sharpening. I think that he is interested in sharpening for sure, but I believe he would like to see issues of general woodworking as well. I showed my wife the picture of your plane, she said you should sell one to me. Maybe I'll revisit that question after I try to make one for myself. Be well, love your work. Keep it up.
Steve
Hi Steve,
Sorry I don't have any pictures as I said before I don't spend the time to take many pictures of my work, but I will take few for you and send them to you. The camera I use is a D700 and it is a full frame one which was the reason why I got it.
The wood I've used was a nice piece of hard maple, but you can use any hard wood with grain as uniform, as possible, white and red oak , beech, or other would be OK to use. I believe David in his book makes a number of suggestions about what wood to use. It wasn't hard to build, there are few tricky operations very well explained in his book and anybody can build a plane, as you could see in the picture I made a mistake when laid out the hole for the wedge support but luckily it didn't overlap with the place where I should have placed the hole in the first place. So I don't think you should worry about and if you don't find a suitable thickness in the wood you decide to make it you can also laminate two piece together. It is important though for the wood to be dry and to get acclimatized with your shop for a couple of weeks.
Yes I live in Maple Ridge very close to Vancouver, that is why it is so watery here.
I could make you one but it may take me a while as I am pretty busy lately, but I think you would lose the best part of it. The satisfaction of using the plane you have made which will count more than owning the most precise and most expensive and fancy premium plane that has been ever made, which BTW, you may find is not performing for the money you paid. And on the second hand it is a pleasure to make it.
All the best,
Ionut
Hi Ionut,
Afetr all this, I just have to tell you. I still have not been able to get anything as sharp as I would like with the T7. I seem to have been able to keep the blade I'm working with reasonably square, but just today, I put a chisel in, took it from the 220 through the 1000. All that was OK, but then I changed stones to the 4000 Japanese waterstone. I marked the bevel to keep it true to the 220/1000 stone as we previously discussed and even though I ground square on the 220/1000 stone, the chisel didn't square up correctly on the 4000 stone, even though it was definately square in the jig. Somehow, I thought it was all going to be automatic, but apparently there is going to be a bigger learning curve than I anticipated. I think once I get the hang of it, all will be fine. But it takes some work in the beginning. I'd like to go to a class. I'm going to see if there is someone in this area who can walk me through it one time.
Anyway, I will build my own plane, as soon as I get the book which should be by the end of this week. I have to get some advice on how to upload an image when I get it done.
Meanwhile, be cool and stay dry.
Steve
Hi Steve,
I realized that in my other square issue posts I missed a step I take that I believe in your case may be important. This is because most of the complains were mostly related to one stone use and, I don't have to change stones often having two machines. But because you have to change the stones you may want to pay attention to the following aspect.
Regardless how well the stones are made they shaft hole in the center may not be perfectly square to the stone so if that's the case every time when the stone is mounted if is not mounted in the original position when the stone was trued you may end with a non flat rotation plane of the grinding surface.
To avoid this possible issue I would suggest to do this. Take a sharp tool, an awl a sharp nail or anything that is sharp enough to mark or score the end of the shaft (where the stone tightening nut is mounted) with a line along the diameter of the shaft. Make sure you don't affect the threads. Mark with a black or any coloured sharpie one extremity of the of that line. You can use any marking method that is permanent enough. Then take the stone and with the same sharpie draw a radial line from the center for about 1 ". When you mount the stone on the shaft make sure you align both marks and tighten by hand the nut as much as you can making sure the alignment of the marks is still kept. Completely tighten the nut by twisting the wheels in opposite direction or using the hammer if you have the old nut. I usually tighten the old nut but twisting the wheels in the opposite direction as well. The stone should not slide from the original position when the nut is completely tighten, but if it does don't worry it will be just a bit. If you never applied this step you will have to true the stone again to make sure it is flat in correlation with the actual position. Don't worry if you have to true it again, you only have to take thin 'slices' I never go beyond 1/12th of the US adjusting wheel even if I have to make multiple passes. You can do the same.
Repeat the same process for the 4000 stone and every time when you mount a any stone make sure to align it in the same way. This should eliminate any concentricity issue with the stones.
Another aspect that you may want to pay attention to is the adjusting wheel of the US. The thread is not the most precise thread ever made and that may lead to slight changes in the US orientation. When you decided the exact position of the adjusting wheel, before tightening the knobs, get the jig off the US and backup the adjusting wheel half of a turn (lower the support), then while holding finger pressure exactly over the threaded post and lift the US by rotating the adjusting wheel back to it's original position. Then while still pressing on the threaded post tighten the knobs. This should minimize the inaccuracies generated by the US assembly.
If you measured the offset between the grinding and honing stones in adjusting wheel turns or fractions of turns I would also suggest you to approximate the adjusting wheel at the same number even if the honing would happen at a bit steeper angle, that may also help. I mean if the wheel position was with lets say number 3 at 6 o'clock and if your offset would be 8/6 of the wheel in counter clockwise which means the number 3 mark would be somewhere around 9 o'clock, turn the wheel only 6/6 (one full turn) so the wheel is in the same position as with the grinding wheel. This ensured that if the adjusting wheel is wobbly in the thread, it will always rest on the same plane on the base.
If these things are not helping you may probably got to some mechanical limits of the machine that cannot be overcome. I sometimes if I don't pay attention end with a slightly not square edge and if the tiool is not used in critical cutting I ignore it. Planes always allow you do skew the blades a bit to compensation for non square situations. I pay most attention when the tool I sharpen is used to do precise chopping. If that is not square enough it may push in a different direction during chopping.
Hope this helps.
Ionut
As far as how sharp the tool is, if it has a proper flat back, stop sharpening after the 4000 stone and test the edge on end grain, it has to cut smoothly and leave a waxy kind of look on the wood without tearing off. You should be able to shave very thin slices of wood without forcing the tool. If that happens then you probably mess the edge while using the leather honing wheel. When you use the leather honing wheel after 4000 stone make sure you don't round the edge., the edge has to barely touch the leather, it is easy to see that if the light comes from the side over the tool which will create a shadow on the wheel. The goal is to reduce that shadow to nothing and to not go further than that. The same applies to the back on the tool as well. Until you get a feel about using the leather wheel i suggest you to not apply much pressure and be in more control even if the process will take a bit longer at first. In time you will get better control so you can apply more pressure. When you use the leather wheel coming from a 4000 stone you don't have to use much pressure anyways, the goal is to clean the edge of any microscopic burrs left by the previous step.
Ionut
Hi Ionut,
Thanks for the pics. I especially like the dovetail work. Nice color contrast and nice tight jointery. Hey, since you're sending images, is it possible to send me a sketch of the layout you were describing in that recent post? I'm not sure what exactly I'm trying to achieve. It sounds like some method of aligning the 4000 stone in the exact same position each and every time I use that stone to sharpen, but it also sounds like you want me to align the 4000 stone with the 220/1000 stone so that both stones go in the exact same position each time I sharpen. I work a lot better with show and tell, it's a little confusing to read about it. That is in English, isn't it? Just kidding. If it's too complicated, don't worry about it. But I would like to get the system working properly, however. I bought the Veritas sharpening jig so I can get at least one chisel up to 100% even if I have to do it by hand to get it there, at least the first time. Also, I didn't realize that I should end up with the strop wheel on the back AND the bevel. Live and learn. Do you put the goop on the wheel every time you use it, or just when it seems to be getting dry? Thanks for all your help. BTW, I applied to Red Rocks Community College in Denver for a Certificate in Fine Woodworking. I just got accepted for the Fall Program. Red Rocks has the second largest woodworking program in the country.
Be good...
Steve
Hi Steve,
I am sorry, sometimes when trying to include all the details of the story, it ends being too complicated and confusing. BTW that was not English, it was Sharpenish...
I've included a picture, in English this time :) , at the following link
http://cid-bc168f3568163031.skydrive.live.com/redir.aspx?page=play&resid=BC168F3568163031!309 (http://cid-bc168f3568163031.skydrive.live.com/redir.aspx?page=play&resid=BC168F3568163031!309)
I hope you can see the scratch line on the shaft and the mark on the wheel. The point is to have the shaft and all your stones marked so you align the marks every time when you mount them. Don't forget to true the stones with the marks aligned.
You don't need to strop if you don't want, I found though that proper stropping will make the edge even better. I use honing compound only when the honing effectiveness is diminished.
Ionut
Hi Ionut,
Makes perfect sense now that I can see it. So, there is really no logic as to where you draw the line such as the measuring the distance from the center of the shaft to the outside of the wheel? In other words, the line is totally arbitrary. It is just a reference point on each wheel so that the wheel gets mounted in the exact same position each time you use it. Is that right?
Steve
Yes Steve that is correct, you mark the shaft and the stones where you want and with whatever marks you like. The point is to be able to always mount the stones in the same location in relation to the shaft. This will ensure, if the stones are trued based to this alignment, that every time when you change the stones the grinding plane is kept the same.
Ionut
Great Ionut, I got it. Thanks,
Steve
This is only going to work if the inside washer is also kept in the same alignment as well. The fit between the inside face of the stone, the inside washer and the shoulder in the shaft determines the angle at which the stone is mounted to the shaft. The stone can be in the same alignment to the shaft, but if the inside washer slips a quarter turn, the perpendicularity of the stone can be affected.
Hi Jeff,
Yes, that is right, but considering the fact that the washer is fully supported on the plastic bearing that doesn't move and the fact that the thickness of the material for the washer is being uniform I considered in my case to ignore marking the washer as well as when I tested it in different position it didn't make a difference for my grinding machine. It may make a difference on other machines so it may be a good idea to take that in consideration as well.
Thanks,
Ionut
Is the washer accessible such that you can mark it while marking the shaft and the stone?
Steve
Hi Steve,
There are two washers sandwiching the stone, the one that can be also marked is the one close to the machine you can get access to it when you remove the stone.
Ionut
I took my stone off and I can see the inside washer. I'm going to mark thr center of the shaft and run a line up to the washer for reference. Then I'll transfer the line on the shaft onto the stone. I think that should get it.
Steve
Hey KenS & Ionut,
What do you guys like for a dovetail saw? How many tpi, 15 or 20?
Steve
Steve,
I use a nice old Disston straight handle dovetail saw which is probably a hundred years old. I have no complaints with it. If I was going to purchase a saw today, I would probably get the regular (15 or 14 tooth) Lie-Nielsen or Lee Valley. If you plan to do a lot of dovetails with thin boards (1/2" or less) the 20 tooth saw might be useful. I would start with the standard 15 tooth saw. I have seen the Lee Valley saw. It's very nice. I tend to be more of a traditionalist, so I would lean toward the Lie-Nielsen. Although I like my present straight handle saw, I would probably get a pistol grip handle.
There are other premium saws available as well. Lie-Nielsen offers a saw sharpening service for its saws, although I wonder how often a sixty year old hobbyist would need the service.
Ken
ps Ernie Conover has written an excellent dovetail book.
Hi Steve,
I am currently making my own. I've used a great Japanese one, I still do, not so often though, I believe it depends on the moon phases, 18 tpi that leaves a planned like kerf surfaces, I find it a bit slow or I am trying to be too fast. I used a 14tpi Veritas saw which is a good one but not aggressive enough as the rake angle is 14-15 degrees. I personally prefer the current one I am making, 18tpi is good for almost anything and the steel is 0.018 thick and the rake is 6-8 degrees, heavy back, 0.002-0.003 set. After I've sharpened and set it, the blade cuts like a hot knife in a chunk of butter and also has a larger effective depth of cut, 2". Unfortunately I rushed my first handle and I am not entirely happy with the slot I've cut, so my second handle is waiting for being slotted and shaped, but somehow the days seems to e too short lately...
Ionut
Hi Ionut,
What do you thing about the Lie-Nielsen progressive tooth dovetail saw?
Steve
Hi Steve,
Well I am not sure if that is a real progressive tpi or two different tpi areas. In my opinion is just a marketing thing made to attract people. Regardless which way is it, it is meant to ease the starting of the cut as the number of tpi towards the far end of the front of the saw is larger. But that would never replace the learning curve of using the saw. When you get accustomed with the saw you will know how to start the cut regardless of the number of tpi. Also that may make the maintenance of the saw, especially sharpening more painful as you may probably need to use two files size to sharpen the teeth. If is not more expensive than a constant tpi saw you can try it, but if you ask me what I would do, I would not bother with it.
I am sorry if I am again in the position to cut your wings, but I wouldn't help by telling you something else than I really believe.
Ionut