HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: coffin@surfin.Eng.Sun.COM (Chip Coffin)
Newsgroups: rec.woodworking
Subject: Arbor/ Blade Runout
Date: 9 Oct 92 16:47:48 GMT
Reply-To: coffin@surfin.Eng.Sun.COM
Organization: Sun Microsystems
NNTP-Posting-Host: surfin

In the delta contractors saw note someone mentioned .01" of
arbor runout.  

Personally, I think this is *way*way*way* too much.  I just
measured the blade runout of my new powermatic, and that is 
about .005 near the teeth.  If the arbor runout was .01, then
the blade runout could be 10 times worse than that.

My delta ras has about .01 of runout near the teeth of a 12" blade.

So, does anyone have any *real* specs on what arbor runout 
should/could be?  Likewise, what is acceptable for blade 
runout?

Also, how does one accuratly measure these?  Does the 
spinning of the blade help to reduce this affect?  i.e. is there
a "dynamic runout" vs a "static runout"?


thanks

chip
From: bds@mbunix.mitre.org (Smith)
Newsgroups: rec.woodworking
Subject: Re: experience w/Jet jointer
Date: 9 Oct 92 18:06:12 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: The MITRE Corporation, Bedford, MA

>
>While the price was right and all will probably work well in the end, I get a certain amount
>of pleasure working with a good piece of machinery. I saw the $1000+ Powermatic and Delta's
>earlier this week after I bought the Jet and definitely think they're worth the $$$. If the
>Powermatic jointer is anything like my 66 table saw, it's a keeper !!!
>
>Tom Spelce

While you're at it, check out the Davis and Wells 6" jointer.  It's
about $1500.  It's 62 inches long, and has some very nice features.
You can get their number from FWW.  They're located in Los Angeles.

Barry
From: brown@venus.iucf.indiana.edu (Robert J. Brown)
Newsgroups: rec.woodworking
Subject: Re: Norm's Biscuit Joiner
Date: 12 Oct 92 20:29:52 GMT
Article-I.D.: usenet.Bw101B.8sB
Reply-To: brown@venus.iucf.indiana.edu
Distribution: na
Organization: IUCF
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.3-4

In article <199210091556.AA09292@tuna.wang.com>, STEVE.BUSSELL@OFFICE.WANG.COM ("Steve Bussell") writes...
>I believe the biscuit joiner that Norm uses on NYW is the one made by
>ELU(European Black and Decker).  Model #3380 is a nice unit in the $250 price
>range.  Wish I had the money for one, but my Freud JS100 works just fine for
>less than half the price.
> 
>Regards,   Steve Bussell

  I've also seen Norm use a PC 555, and of course the Delta bench model
with the foot operated (via cable) plunger. I purchased the Freud myself
after seeing Norm use the Elu because I thought it looked akward to use.
Kind of "sideways" if you know what I mean. But now after having used the
Freud for hundreds of cuts, and seeing Norm use the Elu a few more times,
I can see that the Elu might not be a bad machine after all. You might 
have a little better feel of the cut as it appears the Elu has a single
pivot point whereas the Freud (& like models) slide on two guide bars.
But hey, I paid a hundred bucks and change for the JS100 and it'll do
just fine!

Cheers,     B**2                           
Newsgroups: rec.woodworking
From: clarke@watson.ibm.com (Ed Clarke)
Subject: Re: General vs. Powermatic
Date: Wed, 07 Oct 1992 15:31:05 GMT
Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not necessarily those of IBM
Organization: IBM T.J. Watson Research Center
Keywords: general, powermatic

In article <3861@ecicrl.ocunix.on.ca>, clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis) writes:

|> Yes, quite a bit of beer.  But gawd, it's expensive.  Beaver tails
|> are cheaper and keep you warmer.

Ok, how about posting a recipe to rec.food.drink?  And how do you keep 
PETA from complaining about all those tailless beavers, eh?  Is a
table saw or radial arm saw better for the amputations or should I go
back to Roy Underhill methods and use a broad-axe?
From: paradis@sousa.ltn.dec.com (Jim Paradis)
Newsgroups: rec.woodworking
Subject: Re: need help using a scraper
Date: 12 Oct 92 14:06:22 GMT
Reply-To: paradis@sousa.ltn.dec.com (Jim Paradis)
Distribution: na
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation


>BTW, the Veritas burnishing jig does work quite well for the burnishing
>part of the traditional sharpening process.

Like the author of the original article in this thread, I just started 
getting into cabinet scrapers myself.  I bought the Veritas jig because
I figured it would be foolproof -- the only information I could find
*anywhere* on how to sharpen a scraper was really sketchy (you'd think
that they'd pack sharpening instructions with scrapers and burnishers...),
so I didn't feel capable of getting good results with a traditional
burnisher...

Anyhow, I seem to be getting passable results, but I get the nagging
suspicion it could be a lot better.  So my question to you scraper experts
is this:  When do I know that I'm *done* burnishing?  How big a hook should
I have?  Is it possible to *over* burnish?

Thanks,

--
Jim Paradis (paradis@tallis.enet.dec.com) 
Working for DEC, speaking for myself.

Newsgroups: rec.woodworking
From: jhp@sactoh0.sac.ca.us (Jim H. Puga)
Subject: Protecting a table saw
Summary: Suggestions as to how?
Keywords: table saw
Organization: Sacramento Public Access Unix
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 92 19:29:37 GMT

I have my table saw in the garage.  Since I don't think I will be
using it much during the winter months, I was curious as to how
you folks stored your saws.  

Can I just cover it with a blanket or something and be done with
it?

How do you guard against rust?

These are the main questions I have.  Any and all advice is gladly
accepted.

Thanks in advance.

-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------
- jhp@sactoh0.SAC.CA.US    What else can I say?             -
-------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: rec.woodworking
From: stevep@lugh.se.hou.compaq.com (Steve Pinn)
Subject: Re:      nailing w/o splitting
Organization: Compaq Computer Corporation
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 22:14:37 GMT

In article <WOODWORK%92101214190202@IPFWVM.BITNET>,         JM01@SWTEXAS.BITNET writes:
|> I'm getting ready to nail some 3/4" lattice onto the base of my deck--each
|> slat is 3/8" thick.  However, I'm a little worried about splitting the lattice
|> by hammering the nails through.  I've seen folks dull the tips of nails by
|> whacking them a couple times with a hammer, before driving them into narrow
|> boards, to avoid splitting.  Does this really do any good?  Does dulling the
|> tip cause the nail to crush wood fibers as it's driven, instead of spreading
|> them apart?  Is there any type of nail that would be recommended for nailing
|> up this lattice--perhaps something that's less likely to split the wood, and
|> is somewhat resistant to corrosion in the rain?
|> 

Joe, I can't speak to the type of nails you should use but I can attest to the fact that if you dull the point of a nail it less likely to split the wood.  I think it's magic but "those who know" have explained to me that dulling, as you said, crushes the wood.  A sharp point on a nail tends to act like a wedge and thus has a tendancy to cause splits.

Steve
From: davallen@vms.macc.wisc.edu
Newsgroups: rec.woodworking
Subject: Re: Grizzly Bandsaw
Date: 9 Oct 92 13:16:11 GMT
Organization: University of Wisconsin Academic Computing Center

In article <pea.718418618@spider.wri.com>, pea@spider.wri.com (Bruce Pea) writes...

>Can anyone tell me anything about Grizzly's bandsaws?
> 
>I'm going to be getting a bandsaw in the near future and I'm trying
>to figure out which one to get. I've spoken to a couple of people
>who are satisfied with Grizzly tablesaws and I'm wondering if there
>bandsaws are of comparable quality?
> 
>Does anyone know how the Grizzly compares to Delta's? 
> 
>Thanks in advance for your opinions and feedback.
> 

>
I got their 14" bandsaw a couple of months ago.  Some of the parts didn't
fit together particularly well (I've still got 1 piece to put on), but
otherwise I've been very happy with it.  I'm building a log home, and I've
used it mostly for ripping 4X5s, 4X4s and 5X10s and 6" logs.  This bandsaw,
with a 3/4" blade cuts these things like butter -- a WHOLE lot better that
trying to cut them on a table saw, or with a hand circ. saw.  I've been
pleased with it, and I'm confident that when it comes to fine tuning,
I won't be disappointed.  It's a good solid machine (if a little rough).

	Dave Allen
	Space Science & Engr. Ctr.
	UW-Madison
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-VMS-To: IN%"WOODWORK%IPFWVM.BITNET@pucc.Princeton.EDU"
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: rec.woodworking
Date:         Tue, 13 Oct 1992 07:45:06 -0800
From:         RMTYE@BIIVAX.DP.BECKMAN.COM
Subject:      Re: Wooden ball clock

One source for you ball bearings is a well equiped hunting / sporting
goods store. They are often sold as sling shot ammo.

Of hand I don't have any names; but, I've seen several "electronics"
resale catalogs that list odd motors and I believe 1 rpm's are pretty common
there. You should be able to find a copy of "nuts and volts" at a local
electronics / ham radio store, it will have adds for the type of catalog
I'm suggesting.

                              Ron Tye (all opinions are fictional
                                       any resembelence to a real
                                       opinion, living or dead, is
                                       purly coinsedental).
Newsgroups: rec.woodworking
From: bennett@adobe.com(Bennett Leeds)
Subject: Re: help: wood movement in design
Reply-To: bennett@adobe.com
Organization: Adobe Systems Incorporated
Distribution: na
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 17:11:35 GMT

John Wack writes
> The first question is: provided I use my usual finish which is
> a mixture of tung oil/poly and I finish all sides, is it still necessary
> to account for wood movement?  Hopefully no, but my guess is yes.

Your guess is correct, unless you plan on keeping the unit in a humidity 
controlled environment forever.

> The
> back will expand and contract horizontally, making the piece either more
> wide or more narrow.

Actually, the piece will stay the same width since it's essentially framed 
with the grain. The back needs to float within that.


>  How does one account for that?  Would using a joint
> such as a tongue and groove down the middle of the back (and not glueing 
> it) be the way to go?  Is there some more elegant solution?  

The T&G would certainly work. More elegant and elaborate would be to make 
a frame and panel back. Simpler is to use a plywood back. Another option 
is to place the back inside dadoes in the sides of the unit, although this 
reduces the usable depth of the unit.

I'd expect about an 1/8" of wood movement across the 12" width. I'd have 
to use Hoadley's equations and a calculator to figure out the exact value
given a specified humidity range, and I don't have them handy.

Note that except for the frame and panel or plywood options you'll have 
difficulties using the back to help support the unit. If the wood is 
floating it's not contributing much to overall rigidity. Since it can't
contribute to rigidity, there's no reason it needs to be a full 3/4" thick.

- Bennett Leeds
bennett@adobe.com
Newsgroups: rec.woodworking
From: M19120@mwvm.mitre.org
Subject: After Market Fence for Ryobi/Makita Table Saws
Organization: The MITRE Corporation, McLean VA 22102
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 12:07:24 GMT

I was at my local Hechinger Home Center this weekend and
noticed a new product.  A fence for the small Makita and Ryobi
Bench-top Table saws (e.g. Ryobi 2500).  The fence was made by
a company called Rousseau from Clarksville Wa. and seemed to be
of good quality.  The fence extended the width of cut on  these
saws to 24.5 inches.
 
Is anyone familiar with the fence or the company?
From: bennett@adobe.com (Bennett Leeds)
Newsgroups: rec.woodworking
Subject: Re: Delta contractor's saw
Date: 8 Oct 92 21:25:55 GMT
Reply-To: bennett@adobe.com
Distribution: na
Organization: Adobe Systems Incorporated

bill nelson writes
> apoyner@as.arizona.edu (Tony Poyner) writes:
> : >: blade is not parallel to the slots. Casual measurement reveals a
> : >: difference of several thousandths of an inch (perhaps as much as
> : >: .01'', but I haven't measured carefully yet) between the blade-to-slot
> : >: distances at the front and back of the blade.
> : >
> : >I doubt seriously if you need better alignment that with .01". It
> : >certainly would be a matter of trial and error to do much better.
> : >
> : I disagree.  It took me several iterations to get mine aligned to 0.001
> : to 0.002", but I certainly was not satisfied with the 0.008 or so that
> : it came with.
> : {...}
> {...}
>
> Remember,  the miter gauge on your saw probably has more play than that
> in the groove. 

True, and that is one of those user modifications that tablesaw owners 
should perform. It can be accomplished by everything from brute force
banging on the bar to widen it and belt sanding to lessen the width to
using an Incra adjustable miter gauge bar to installing Cool Blocks on set 
screws in the side of the bar.


> The end runout on the motor arbor is also likely to be
> around .01".

The contractor's saw uses a belt drive, so play in the motor's arbor won't 
affect the blade arbor, which will probably have much less end runout than 
0.01".


> ...It is doubtful if you can measure that close, using a steel rule.

The blade to slot parallelness is critical not for cut width, but for cut 
quality. If the blade isn't parallel to the slots the rear teeth will actually 
do some cutting, which results in a scratchy cut. A non-flat blade has the same 
effect.

Your points about accuracy in other elements of the table saw *are* important. 
However, they actually work against your arguments. Since the final results are 
a sum of many errors you want to reduce the magnitude of each error, not ignore 
them and say: well, it can't get any better. 

If you align your table saw, miter gauge, and rip fence to tighter tolerances 
than the wood itself can support you make your end results much more 
predictable and accurate. 

- Bennett Leeds
bennett@adobe.com
Newsgroups: rec.woodworking
From: billn@hpcvaac.cv.hp.com (bill nelson)
Subject: Re: Delta contractor's saw
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Company, Corvallis, Oregon USA
Distribution: rec.woodworking
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1992 16:45:18 GMT

mfb@metropolis.super.org (Michael F. Bridgland) writes:
: 
: The saw is now assembled, and generally is satisfactory. The Jet-Lock
: fence is a bad joke, but that came as no surprise, because of what
: others have written about it. Adjustments to the saw itself are
: simple, with two exceptions. The blade guard adjustment is just plain
: clumsy. And the manual does not explain how to align the blade
: to the table slots.  Supposedly this was done at the factory, but the
: blade is not parallel to the slots. Casual measurement reveals a
: difference of several thousandths of an inch (perhaps as much as
: .01'', but I haven't measured carefully yet) between the blade-to-slot
: distances at the front and back of the blade.

I doubt seriously if you need better alignment that with .01". It
certainly would be a matter of trial and error to do much better.

Bill
From: RON.SANDS@OFFICE.WANG.COM ("Ron Sands")
Newsgroups: rec.woodworking
Subject: Table saw blade guard usage
Date: 13 Oct 92 18:50:10 GMT
Article-I.D.: tuna.199210131756.AA14946
Organization: Wang Laboratories - Imaging Support Group

I was compelled to write this in response to a user who wrote

   "I do not use the blade guard (does anyone?)."

First, let me assure you I do use the blade guard ALWAYS after the lesson
taught to me by a new Delta 10" tilting arbor saw that replaced a rather
docile Rockwell.  I had purchased the Rockwell at a garage sale some time
ago and enjoyed years of use.  However, it was pretty easy to slow the blade
or stall it if I fed large lumber through too fast.  And if something was
cocked a bit the same result, the blade would stop or nearly so.

Enter Mr. Delta.  I forget the HP rating but it sucks 220 volts and cuts wood
like butter.  You can probably see what's coming already.  Since I never used
a guard, anti-kickback device or whatever on the previous saw, I didn't think
twice about leaving the one off of the Delta when I set it up.  Things went

Thing went smoothly for months until I got a piece of 3/8" plywood halfway
through the cut and then fed it a bit unstraight!  Before I knew what had
happened, the plywood which was about 2 foot by 3 foot was caught by the blade
and thrown into my pelvic bone with force enough to raise a lump the size of a
fist.  If I had been using the blade guard, anti-kickback and splitter device
this would have never happened.  As fast as it happened I would never would
have had time to keep my hand out of the blade if I had been far enough
through the cut either.

I would strongly advise anyone to always use the guard on whatever power tool
you have and if you have an older model without it, buy or make some sort of
alternative.  No one is going to call you sissy for using it but I'll bet
they'll think you pretty stupid if you tell them how you lost three fingers
because you were too macho to use the guard.

Ron
Newsgroups: rec.woodworking
From: stevep@lugh.se.hou.compaq.com (Steve Pinn)
Subject: Re: Hand Plane Question
Organization: Compaq Computer Corporation
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1992 21:51:54 GMT

In article <1992Oct7.184322.2071@porthos.cc.bellcore.com>, patter@dasher.uucp (24224-guthrie) writes:
|> In article <1992Oct7.145707.25514@medtron.medtronic.com> jw7348@norway.medtronic.com (Jeff Wilkinson) writes:
|> 
|> >...... Even though I generally use a lot of power tools, there is
|> >still nothing as emotionally satisfying as using a plane.
|> 
|> Speaking of which, are Record planes really worth the extra bread (versus
|> Stanley). I'm shopping for a jointer plane myself, and the Record is $90.
|> I haven't found a Stanley jointer yet, but a couple of phone calls ought
|> to get me one. Should I bother with the calls, or buy the Record.
|> 
|> patter@dasher.cc.bellcore.com
|> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
|>                     | "Under Consideration": We never heard of it.
|> George Patterson -  | "Under Active Consideration": We're searching the
|>                     |    files for it.
|>                     |         Kelvin Throop - The Management Dictionary
|> -----------------------------------------------------------------------

George, go for the Primus wooden planes!  That's where the real pleasure is (mostly for the guy getting your money) <G>  Truly if you are making a significant investment in planes do look at the Primus wooden planes.  I have their reform smoothing and block planes and just love to use them.  As an aside when I bought both of these planes it took less the 10 minutes of work to bring the plane iron backs flat unlike Stanley and Record which I have spent closer to an hour to achieve the same goal.

Steve
Newsgroups: rec.woodworking
From: walt@eng.clemson.edu (Walter B. Ligon III)
Subject: Re:      Sharpening Carving Tools
Reply-To: walt@eng.clemson.edu
Organization: College of Engineering, Clemson Univ.
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1992 17:56:42 GMT

The most recent FWW has an excellent article by Toshio Odate about sharpening
Gouges.  I suggest you look at that for at least one point of reference.

Walt

PS, it is interesting to note that Odate- who uses waterstones for chisels and
plane irons (he IS Japaneese) uses Arkansas Oil stones for sharpening gouges.
presumably because they do not deform as badly because they are not as soft.



Newsgroups: rec.woodworking
From: mikel@col.hp.com (Mike Lopke)
Subject: Re: tail vises
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 18:39:03 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: HP Colorado Springs Division

steveo@think.com (stephen anthony) writes:
> 
> My question is, which design is better and why? Certainly, Frid's design is
> more frequently seen in top quality benches, hence, is considered the better
> design. But how much better is it?
> 

The evaluation of these two designs has alot to due with how the bench is
used and personal preferance.   Of course if you asked Frid he'ld prefer
his vice.  If you asked Norm, he'ld probably prefer his.  Why is that?
Here is my guess.

Norm's vice - quick and simple to build 
	      adequate for power tools  
              nifty design simplification he came up with? 

Frid's vice - old and proven design that works 
	      made for hand tool techniques yet versitile
	      learned on a similar type bench  

My personal choise would be Frid's.  I'ld say, as a rule of thumb, ask
youself which of the two guys "styles" you are closest to and use his
vice.  

Reguards,
Mike Lopke
Newsgroups: rec.woodworking
From: doshay@ursa.arc.nasa.gov (David Doshay)
Subject: Re: How do I bend an oak 4x4?
Organization: NASA-Ames Biocomputation Center
Distribution: na
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 23:09:21 GMT

For this purpose I would definitely laminate around a template. 1/2" strips
and no steam will work fine if only the top needs the curve, and if you are
willing to use 1/8" strips you could also get the top to curve smoothly into
the corner posts. I have been bending 0.20" redwood around a canoe, and recently
tried some oak just for comparison. Thin oak bends well, even around a fairly
sharp bend if you go slowly. Redwood snaps easily by comparison.

A little steam or just water should make it easy.

There is a FWW collection of articles into a book called "On Bending Wood."
You should read it. There is a great article about using Anhydrous ammonia
to plastisize wood. This gas is not to be taken lightly, but with the right
equipment and a windy day it gives amazing results. I am wondering about the
effectiveness of soaking the wood in household ammonia for a partial plasti-
zitation of the wood, but I have not had the time to try it yet.

Have fun

David		doshay@soma.arc.nasa.gov

The thought police insist I tell you:
my thoughts, not NASA's
Newsgroups: rec.woodworking

john dobbs> I have been trying to make an analogy between a jointer and
john dobbs> a hand plane.  In the case of a hand plane, the "infeed"
john dobbs> portion (the front of the sole) and the "outfeed" portions
john dobbs> (the back of the sole behind the blade) are the same level
john dobbs> (or are supposed to be in a properly "fettled" plane).  The
john dobbs> question is which portion of the plane is acting as the
john dobbs> register as the outfeed table acts in a jointer (the
john dobbs> apparant answer is that the entire body of the plane is
john dobbs> acting in this way).  It seems that the material under the
john dobbs> back part of the sole of the plane is lower than the
john dobbs> material under the front part of the plane because material
john dobbs> has been remove by the blade.  How does material become
john dobbs> flat if this is the case?

I don't think there's *that* much in common.  The sole of the hand plane
suspends it over the work on top of any irregularities.  The blade,
which drops below the sole, removes the irregularities, eventually
dropping the sole flush with the perfected surface.  To remove cupping,
you need to keep the sole plate level, working from the center out.  A
wider plane would make for better removal of cupping since it would help
maintain level as you work across the board.  As the board approaches
perfect, you need to be raising the blade until it does nothing.
There's nothing inherent in a hand plane that makes it good for this
task, in my opinion, although its better than an axe :-)

Rob