From: bennett@adobe.com (Bennett Leeds)
Newsgroups: rec.woodworking
Subject: Re: re: Jointer vs Planer - Thanks
Date: 28 Dec 92 19:11:23 GMT
Reply-To: bennett@adobe.com
Distribution: na
Organization: Adobe Systems Incorporated

G. Paul Houtz writes
>    The argument is simply that the jointer is a far more useful tool.

You've gotten no argument from me on this point, yet.

My counter argument, which you've consistently ignored, is that it's easier to  
configure another tool to perform jointing tasks than it is to configure  
another tool, even a jointer, to perform thickness planing tasks. The thickness  
planing jigs are more complicated and more tricky to adjust than the jointing  
jigs. You have wisely not even attempted to refute this. 


>    Now, you could argue that I could cut all my stock to size, then set up
>    the router, then joint the edges of all the stock. But that defeats
>    the purpose of routing to get a decent edge to use against fences. 

No, I would argue that you would joint the edges of all the boards using your  
router jointing jig, then rip/crosscut the stock to size. This is as you do  
now: edge joint, then rip.


>     The convenience is having a jointer and a saw both working at the same
>     time.

When you move your router futher away from the main table in your extension  
wing, you could have a second fence setup at the router for jointing, so that  
you can still use your tablesaw fence solely for ripping. Since you aren't  
using boards wider than 6", the two fences shouldn't interfere with each other.

Besides, the loss of this convenience is smaller than the loss of convenience  
of not having a thickness planer, or trying to jerry-rig your jointer to  
perform thickness planing tasks. It is the price one pays for being able to  
have only one tool.


> > A planer would do the job
> >just as well. If your planer end-snipes, feeding a scrap board immediately
> >behind the work will cause the snipe to occur on the scrap instead.
>
>   It's funny.  I tried this once in a planer.  Since there is no support
>   on the open end of the box side, the pressure of the planer twisted the 
>   drawer side in at the middle.

Who said anything about running an *assembled* drawer or box through the  
planer? You simply run the board that you've cut the finger joints in through  
the planer. Before assembling the box, of course.


>   Explain to me how the table saw would make rabbits faster.

For deep rabbets, you would have to make more passes on the jointer than on a  
tablesaw. The tablesaw requires only two passes with a regular blade - you run  
the board on edge for the second cut. Since you can't do deep passes on your  
jointer, I take it back - for the rabbets within the capacity of your jointer,  
the jointer is faster.

> >...I'd probably clean it up with hand plane - probably almost
> >as fast and it'd give a better finish than a power jointer.
> 
>   I find this extremely debatable.

Why? A hand plane cuts a continuous shaving, rather than a bunch of individual  
scallops. It also doesn't pound the wood the way jointer or planer knives can.  
You might want to check out James Krenov's books on this subject, BTW ;^).

You should sight down your power jointer-finished surface, with a light hitting  
it at a complementary angle (work between you and the light). Or, just set your  
finished box on a coffee table and take a look at it when the sun is rising or  
setting through a window. Having your jointer tuned and feeding the work slowly  
simply increases the number and reduces the size of the scallops, but they are  
always there.


>  This is the last I have to say in this matter.

G. Paul Houtz writes (1 day later) 
>    You might want to check out James Krenov's "A Cabinetmaker's Notebook".

So much for the last you had to say in this matter.


>    So, now I have Bernard Maas on my side, saying a jointer is an essential
>    woodworking tool, and also James Krenov, in addition to Tag Frid who
>    also uses his jointer as a planer.

To my knowledge none of these people have written that one should buy a jointer  
instead of a thickness planer if one can afford only one of the two. 

"A Cabinetmaker's Notebook" was written quite a while ago, as was Frid's  
article in FWW on jigging a jointer as a thickness planer. I'll bet both were  
written before the first portable planer was available. They didn't have this  
option of jointer versus planer back then - a jointer was significantly more  
affordable.

In Krenov's woodworking class at The College of the Redwoods, they've used an  
Inca thickness planer for about a decade now. Frid has a thickness planer. I've  
noticed that Frid did not include his jointer thickness planing jig in his  
woodworking trilogy. I wonder why - many other of his jigs are included. 

Finally, I agree with Mr. Mas in that jointing capabilities are essential. I  
just happen to believe that thickness planing capabilities are equally  
essential.

- Bennett Leeds
bennett@adobe.com
Newsgroups: rec.woodworking