1. Home
  2. Woodworking Forum
  3. Pin Nailer Question

Pin Nailer Question

Does anyone have any experience with pin nailers? What are they typically used for? Are they a necessary additional to the air nailer arsenal?

Reply to
phillywoodworker1
Loading thread data ...

I guess if you have to ask, it's not a necessary addition.

Reply to
Mike Marlow

I agree, but I am not a tool collector. I believe in the theory of buying a tool when a particular project absolutely requires it and buying the best quality tool that you can afford for the task.

Reply to
Frank Drackman

I use one daily for nailing the thin edge of casings. They work very well on thin stock and help to prevent splitting that you might get with a larger fastener.

Mike O.

Reply to
Mike O.

If he doesn't know what they do, how is he supposed to know if he needs one?

Reply to
CW

The phillywoodworker1 entity posted thusly:

Would that also be known as a 'brad nailer', shooting 18ga. nails?

If so, I use mine all the time for:

  1. installing moulding
  2. installing OSB wall panels (temporary, until I drive in larger nails or screws.
  3. holding templates/jigs in place (temporary)

If not a brad nailer, I have no idea.

Reply to
Oleg Lego

Reply to
JGS

Don't you _love_ ad hominems rather than answers?

Pins are to nails sort of like Bill Clinton when Hillary's around - no head.

Good news is less visible marks on the surface, bad news is they're not particularly strong. I'd go with the brad nailer for versatility and fill a few holes. If your cash and tool lust is unlimited and you have a lot of applied moldings or thin plywood backs on things, maybe you'd want to consider it. Though with thin ply, I prefer a stapler.

Reply to
George

The answer to that seems kind of simple.

Reply to
Mike Marlow

I didn't see any ad hominems posted in reply to the question. I saw some answers like my own which question what a necessary addition to the air nailer arsenal is, but those aren't personal attacks.

Reply to
Mike Marlow

I have one and find it invaluable for small projects.

For example, when mak> Does anyone have any experience with pin nailers? What are they typically

Reply to
william kossack

????

Quoted text does so much to lend context.

Reply to
Mike Marlow

Hmm...my principles of tool acquisition have always been the opposite.

Strange that, H

Reply to
hylourgos

Naw, I like it when people mislabel fallacies. You know, the old non sequiturs.

cogito ergo fallo, H

Reply to
hylourgos

Reply to
Eddie Munster

Thanks for those inputs that provided useful information.

Reply to
Philly

There's no need to quote text if the point is simple and the hierarchy of dialogue is there. Phillywoodworker asked about pin nailers; you mentioned a general statement to the effect that if you have to ask about it, then you probably don't need it.

However sage this observation may be, it has not been the way many of my tools have appeared in the shop, and other threads stretching back for year have noticed the same phenomenon.

It was, in other words, a humorous reflection on the illogical way that many of us actually collect tools.

H

...now curious whether you and others see hierarchies when reading the Wreck

Reply to
hylourgos

A lot of us, if not most of us, do not see complete hierarchies. We use off-line newsreaders and it's common to mark all threads as read when you complete a sitting. It's equally common to only display unread threads. There's no point in displaying everything that's been read (or ignored) for the past three months. More to the point, it's like any other conversation. A reply to a comment made immediately after the comment makes sense. That same reply issued a day later, out of the blue makes no sense without trying to go back and figure out the context.

I often wonder why, with as much as this is brought up in newsgroups, people still insist that it's not appropriate to include quoted text. I know most new folks don't bother to read up on usenet etiquette these days, but quoting text (and snipping) is a long established courtesy. Yet it seems more and more people come along and state how "it's not necessary". Maybe if folks are going to use uesenet it wouldn't hurt to take a little stroll through the guidelines.

It's not that leaving out quoted text makes you a bad person... we all know that what makes you a bad person is painting cherry with latex paint.

Reply to
Mike Marlow

The hylourgos entity posted thusly:

True, but you have no way of knowing whether the hierarchy is there or not. Most, if not all, newsreaders will show a hierarchy, though in many, the user has the choice of how to display the messages.

My newsreader will display the hierarchy, and I do have it set to show the hierarchy as a tree, but I don't keep all messages in all threads. In that direction lies crowded bits on hard disks. The message I am replying to now is (visibly) part of a hierarchy of two messages that are available to me; yours and one in response to it. I deleted all previous messages in the thread.

In this case I did not need quoted text, for two reasons. The first is that it's pretty much self explanatory, and the second is that I already read your previous posting which had no included text, and remembered it simply because I had no idea who you were responding to.

When I see a posting with no context, if not easily associated with the conversation, I seldom try to dig out the context, and the posting becomes nothing but a little background noise.

As the other fella said, it does not make you a bad person, but it does diminish the point you took time to state.

Reply to
Oleg Lego

Well, that makes sense. I use Google, which gives the (first--and easiest--I might add) option to reply in a way that quotes no text. To quote text, you first have to click user options, then respond. I suspect Google prefers no text responses to keep the space minimal. Using Google, you see the hierarchies, so it all makes good sense. In this regard, I like Google far more than newsreaders. A major benefit of threads in a NG is to preserve the hierarchy of dialogue.

But that's exactly where NGs *differ* from other conversations that require "comment[s] made immediately after...comment[s]". We're able to have a dialogue that stretches for days and weeks. You don't have to be beautiful or wealthy to be persuasive, and you don't have to deliver the timely bon mot. The "context" remains as fresh as ever.

In a way, you answer your own question: it's brought up a lot in NGs because not everyone agrees. I have to laugh every time I read rants about top vs. bottom posting, then someone invariably states some fiat, often complete with reference to some bozo's netiquette list, about how the one or the other is the true doctrine. Reminds me a lot of theology and metaphysics. Just as often, you discover that the rabid adherents of each doctrine use different technology that makes the one or the other doctrine more suitable for their use on their machine. The dogma ends up sounding silly to me.

I can't speak for "people", but I usually quote text, unless I feel the context makes it obvious. I thought you'd recognize the context above, so quoting was unecessary, but I was wrong.

You're using a specific instance (me) to preach a general point (folks) that may not really apply. Maybe my post was not as obvious as I thought. Maybe you weren't thoughtful enough to recognize an obvious point. Regardless, it was not a point of netiquette or courtesy. I do appreciate knowing that many users decide to ignore the hierarchy of threads in their newsreader options.

Ah, well, then I'm safe...I use only oil-based paints on cherry.

H.

Reply to
hylourgos

HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.