so..charlie...you don't already wear glasses huh? heh heh - i get baby-butt smooth edges with a Forrest WWII blade. i do one edge first on the jointer then the opposite edge on the tablesaw. works for me!
can i call you four-eyes now?
Philski
One more observation. I have a Forrest WWII on my saw. I have a jointer. I match up the cut edges from the TS. Sometimes, there's no way I can improve on the fitup with a pass over the jointer. The cut off the TS looks polished and perfectly flat. What's to improve upon? Other times, a pass over the jointer is needed. Ain't no one answer right all the time in my shop. YMMV.
bob g.
TeamCasa wrote:
Got glasses. Use loops on occasion. No magic in the jointer. Smooth is smooth, regardless of which tool produces the surface.
bob g.
TeamCasa wrote:
Neither tool, saw or jointer is going to produce the kind of surface the Hubbell guys are looking for. With experience, every woodworker learns to recognize the surface that's good enough for the kind of work he's doing. I maintain, a good saw blade or a jointer can both produce this surface. I've used a number of blades on the saw that never gave me that surface. The one that came with the saw was a prime example. I don't own stock in Forrest. His is the first blade I bought that would give me the kind of surface I'd put up against the jointer so I've stopped looking. Buying saw blades isn't one of my primary hobbies but that could change. The scalloped surface produced by the jointer has a lot to do with the feed rate. Feed slowly and the scallops will be a lot smaller and finer. When they get fine enough, they are not significant in the scale we worry about in woodworking. The Hubbell guys??? they got their own problems.
bob g.
Doug Miller wrote:
Ok, so you look at your fitup and decide whether a pass over the jointer is indicated. What's that old saying about hard an fast rules being the hobgoblin of something? Damn, getting old is the pits. CRS.
bob g.
TeamCasa wrote:
philski asks:
Actually, I've worn glasses most of my life. No longer need them for distance, since cataract surgery a couple years ago, but I do need them for reading and close up.
So, four-eyes is still right. :)
Charlie Self "There are two ways of exerting one's strength: one is pushing down, the other is pulling up." Booker T. Washington
Bingo!
Quite true -- in fact, I said so in my response to the OP -- but it's a valid concern. If you joint after ripping, you can't be guaranteed of parallel edges any more. All you can do is act to minimize the degree of divergence.
-- Regards, Doug Miller (alphageek-at-milmac-dot-com)
Get a copy of my NEW AND IMPROVED TrollFilter for NewsProxy/Nfilter by sending email to autoresponder at filterinfo-at-milmac-dot-com You must use your REAL email address to get a response.
IMO, you are simply making a mountain out of a molehill in the OP's situation. Ripping to final width will insure the two edges that count are parallel ... wooddorkers need to apply a little common sense to their theoretical "concerns".
i too have been near-sighted since i was 5 or 6. i have been wearing contacts for the last 30 years or so but when they are out, it is bi-focals for me. i usually wear glasses vs contacts in the shop because wood dust under a lens is just hell. i too have been called 4-eyes many times (mostly by my departed dad). but hey, just remember ( i got this line last night watching Carlin intro MNF) "If your're not the lead dog, the view is always the same!"
Philski
Exactly. Dave
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.