Rojek Combination Tool?

Page 1 of 3  
Some troll below asked about whether measurements he couldn't possibly have made were adequate, and someone else provided a link to the distributor's site.
They have a Saw/jointer/planer/shaper/mortiser that "looks" great. I am extremely limited on room and have crappy tools on wheeled bases; better quality tools are just too heavy and big. To use anything I have to rearrange all the tools. My problem is much more space than budget. It would possibly be easier to set up the Rojek each time than to move my tools around, and then I would be using a (presumably) much better tool.
So, has anyone actually used this machine; or any other Rojek tool? Are there any other similar machines made? I would rather have a somewhat smaller 10" saw for instance. (My wife let me move a wall and expand my shop 50% last year; any more seems unlikely. I am almost desperate enough to move my wood to a shed outside.)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

OK, care to explain how I "couldn't possibly have made" the measurements in my post? (Heck, it's only the same basic methodology that you can find in any basic work on maintaining / refurbishing machines, and is certainly doable with the equipment identified in my post.)
Or perhaps you have some particular knowledge of my experience in taking precision measurements . . .
Or perhaps, just perhaps, it is clear who the "troll" actually is . . . .
LKB
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Oh get off it. You don't measure woodworking machinery to 10,000ths of an inch. If your jointer is flat to .01" you are doing fine; no way even the best technique won't induce more error than the jointer at that level of precision. It is better for you to be a troll than the obvious alternative.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Toller, you have no idea what you are talking about. Just because of your inability, don't assume that others have the same handicap.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
I think Toller has some valid points.....
cm

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
The only thing that he was right about is the statement below. We did find out that he can touch type. How else could he have written something coherent with his head up his butt?

If your jointer is flat to .01" you are doing fine;
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
CW wrote:

Dude you don't have a clue. Jointer tables need to be "dead" flat. No variation is acceptable. From what I've read here and elsewhere, I was lucky. My tables are perfect. Tested them myself with a yardstick I picked up at the fabric store while SWMBO was getting material to recover the new dining room chairs I made.
Toller is being cranky because he spent a bundle on his Rojack machine and the tables way out of whack. Now he's gotta send it back and get a replacement.
0.01" ppfftt
A.M. Wood (Morning)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Gee, I don't know about a yardstick; is it long enough?. The "bible", White's Care and Repair of Shop Machines says to use MDF with drywall screws in it. My jointer gave good results when I bought it, so I have never bothered to check.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Toller, I knew you had it in you. That was the right thing to do. I have said for some time and will stand by it. The dial indicator is one of the worst things that ever made it into the home woodshop. Mine stay at work were they are useful. No indicator will ever be used on one of my woodworking machines unless.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Well, my planer knives are disposable. They go in the machine one way, and are "set up"; no way to adjust them. I pretty much do my jointer knives by eye; setting them as closely as I can against a straight edge and then running some wood, and adjusting until the wood is perfectly flat. It might sound (heck, it might be) Micky Mouse, but it works; my wood comes out flat. Never have any gaps in my joints, except a mortise joint a month or two ago where I hit some oversized biscuits; once I sorted them out all was fine.
I would love to at least borrow a band saw tension gauge. I don't doubt I would have much better luch there if my tension was proper. I suspect I have them too loose, but don't want to do any damage by overshooting.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

They said that a hundred years ago too and they had them. Steel rule and spring calipers. Same things I have in my shop. I leave the micrometers, calipers, dial indicators ect at work.

I set up to fifty tools a day using a piece of paper as a feeler gage. It's a rare occurrence that I'm off by more than .0003.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

How do you know when you are off by 3/10,000 of an inch?
It must be nice to be able to say "that's good enough". I am not afforded that luxury at work. We demand that stuff be measured precisely and that it be documented. Eye-balling something and stating that it is "good" doesn't cut it. Everything is measured, set, tagged, inspected, etc. Nothing leaves without everything being as nearly perfect as is possible. People's lives are at stake.
Maybe it overkill to have one's table saw accurate +-.001 or better, but I do it. I view woodworking and machining metal the same. The only difference is some of the tools and the materials involved. Both tasks are best performed when as accurate as possible. Now if all you are building is birdhouses then maybe +-.040 is ok. I want to look at a piece and be reminded that it is built with the highest quality I can muster, not look at it and remember that I filled in a joint with putty because I was off by 1/16th or more.
Cheers.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Haven't been at it long, eh? I build heavy jets.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

If you enjoy the challenge of setting up your machines to 0.001", then go for it. I suppose it is interesting in its own right. I doubt my machines could be set up to that level of precision; they were all purchased used, and weren't very good to start with. Still, I just made a tabletop out of 7 pieces of 10" wide 5/4 oak. No putty, none needed; I was very careful about matching the grain and you can't tell where the individual boards are. Yeah, there are a places across the top where you could slip a pieces of paper (or maybe even two...) under a straightedge, but its darn good. From a jointer that was set by eye...
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Yes, but those measurements at work also have tolerances, correct? And those tolerances are based on what? The stability of the materials, the stress loads, etc., I'm assuming.

That's a point I would disagree with - at least in the sense that beyond a certain level of accuracy there is no discernable improvement in tool performance. Certainly an alignment of a saw blade within .010" is going to cut better than on aligned to .1", but there is this concept of diminishing returns. Then again, the accuracy of the test equipment comes into play. Do you have, or do most people have test equipment that is calibrated, and precise enough to pursue the types of precision you have to deal with at work?

Hmmmmm... here we just went from the thickness of a piece of paper to 1/16" of an inch. That really does not do much to support an arguement for extreme precision. Unless of course, you write on some really thick paper. As for me, I buy the cheap stuff - only a coupla thousands thick.
This really is where these discussions go to hell every time they come up. Someone states that for the intended purpose, precision within a few ten-thousandths is acceptable, and along comes someone else who states how precision is much more important than that and inevitably mutates the acceptable error into some obscene value, just to attempt to prove their point. Unfortunately, the attempt fails because the discussion was never about 1/16" gaps in wood.
--

-Mike-
snipped-for-privacy@alltel.net
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

There are extremes at both ends of the philosophy. 1/16th being at one end and .001 being at the other. If I can attain and reproduce cuts at a tolerance +-.001 then I am going to do it. Why should I do anything less than the very best that I can? This level of accuracy doesn't require constant tweaking and adjustments.
I can cite may different reasons for going a bit overboard with machine setup, etc but it really depends on one's personal preferences.
I have built items with cut tolerances of 1/32 of an inch or so. I was never happy with the end product. This was due to a lack of proper tools or being in a rush or both. Now that I am able to build stuff with precision, I do it. It doesn't take much time and even if no one else knows that I took a little extra time to do it by my definition of "right", I do. Does that mean that the shed I am buildng is held to the same level of precison that I take when building furniture? Of course not.
In summary I demand the very best from myself and my tools.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I don't disagree with the pursuit of precision. My comments above were specifically related to the exageration of the discussion to tolerances of 1/16th of an inch, which started out at tolerances of a couple thousandths. The very argument that introduces such exagerations is by itself, an example of a very imprecise style of conversation. Actually, it is condescending and insulting at the very least. My commentary was soley in address of this argument style.

And I support personal preferences - as long as they are not held up to be something more holy than just that - personal preferences.

I've seen nothing posted in this thread that suggests that the other participants feel otherwise of their tools, projects or abilities.
--

-Mike-
snipped-for-privacy@alltel.net
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

If I made it sound condescending then I apologize. That was not my intent.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It 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.