1. Home
  2. Woodworking Forum
  3. planer or jointer for thicknessing

planer or jointer for thicknessing

In general which would you use to cut a piece down to proper thickness assuming the piece is already

1) planed and shaped properly 2) only a smidgen too large

I have a table leg that is about 3/16th too large, so my first inclination would be to run it over the jointer a couple times to get it down to size. My reasoning is that the jointer has a superior table and I can control the feed much better than my benchtop planer. Also my jointer will shave 1/32 reliably whereas my planer is around 3/32. But would it be a better option to invest in a better planer and use that or is a jointer perfectly acceptable for shaving down wood?

Reply to
Eigenvector
Loading thread data ...

For 3/6", what _I_ would use:

Table saw first; planer second; jointer last, and only if I was not overly concerned with surfaces remaining paralllel to each other.

A jointer simply cannot guarantee that surfaces will remain parallel, as will either a well set up table saw, or planer.

YMMV ...

Reply to
Swingman

"Swingman" wrote

Obviously a typo ... make that "3/16th", NOT 3/6".

Reply to
Swingman

3/16" is a pretty big smidgen.

Ar you sure? My benchtop planer has a MAXIMUM cut of 1/16 per pass. That is one full turn of the crank. I generally try to make the last pass a light one with a quater-turn (1/64th)

You know your tools better that I do, but in my shop, I'd use the planer.

_Steve

** Posted from
formatting link
**
Reply to
StephenM

Totally agree with Swingman.

Reply to
Leon

Each tool has it's purpose.

The planer is used to uniformly plane wood to a nominal thickness.

the jointer, straight edges wood . it also flattens on a single face , takes warp, twist, cupping, etc out of a board, so that it can

be milled to a consistent thickness with a planer. I have never been able to uniformly dress a board to a consistent thickness

with a jointer alone. I have always had both, jointer and planer.

BUT, ,,,,,,,,in your case the jointer would be your best bet, since we are shaving a small controlled amount from

an already dimensioned leg . I use a jointer for this a lot when putting a slight taper in a leg.

KK

Reply to
Ken

I hear what you're saying. The parallel issue is a genuine concern.

I know a few people commented on how I was misstating the precision of the planer, but I know the planer I have and it planes wood but has poor depth control. Its a borrowed tool, so I won't complain, but it just won't do what I need it to do.

However I hear what everyone is saying, a planer is the appropriate tool here.

Reply to
Eigenvector

I disagree with the consensus so far. The jointer should do the job just fine as the leg is already dimensioned with the faces parallel. 3/16 is a small enough amount that any error (10% of 3/16?) introduced would never be noticeable by eye in the finished part. It sounds like Swingman likes to play with his power tools too much. Tablesaw, planer, then jointer?? Or did I miss the sarcasm? Art

Reply to
Artemus

"Artemus" wrote

Nope ... but here's what you did "miss":

  1. My preface: "what _I_ would use:"

  1. My qualifier: " ... if you're not overly concerned with surfaces remaining parallel to each other"

  2. And, most importantly, you seem to be missing a proper understanding of the proper use/capabilities of each tool listed, all "power tools" BTW, a fact which you seem to have missed as well.

Fact: A jointer is simply NOT a proper tool to dimension stock in "thickness", which is what the OP asked.

The planer is the proper tool, and the table saw can be, if set up and used properly, and the dimensioning task falls within it's cutting capability (which 3/16" appears to do in the case of a table leg).

Now you do know.

Reply to
Swingman

I disagree; I think what he missed is that you listed your order of preference for picking *one* tool to use -- he thought you meant to use _all_three_.

Reply to
Doug Miller

"Doug Miller" wrote

I certainly didn't see it that way, but on review, you may well be right. If I indeed "missed" it, I hereby apologize, and thanks for pointing it out!

Reply to
Swingman

That's my take too.

I regularly use a jointer to thin up a board a little bit. It's just quicker for me to take a quick pass over it than to have to measure the thickness of the board, set the planer to the desired thickness and then run it through. If your jointer and jointing technique are spot on, the result will still be parallel.

JP

******************** Flawless.
Reply to
Jay Pique

"Jay Pique" wrote

Sorry, looks like I owe Art an apology. Mea culpa, Art.

3/16th is more than a "little bit" ... AMMOF, it's 1/16th over the maximum recommended cut for many, if not most, jointers.

I know ... multiple passes, but the more passes required over the jointer, the greater likelihood of ruining the "geometry" of the workpiece, and shaving off 3/16th on the jointer is pushing the envelope, IME.

IOW, the resultant risk of trapezoidal chair legs won't necessarily make for centerline 'perpendicular to the floor' joints, which is what chairs leg designs usually require.

Now, a 1/16th or less on a jointer, I could understand ...

Reply to
Swingman

"Swingman" wrote

Make that "table" legs ... shit, the sun must be over the yardarm somewhere in the British Empire, and it's obviously past time for a cocktail on the porch and calling it a day.

Reply to
Swingman

Ther is the right way and of course the path some people take because of a lack of formal training/instruction.

No, he is simply using the method that was taught when this skil was still being taught by those that knew.

Reply to
Leon

"Leon" wrote

dimensioned

LOL ... re-reading this thread I'm starting to realize that there are damn few left around here who have either used/own a jointer, or have ever actually made a table.

When legs attach to table aprons, it doesn't take much experience to know that, if not square/parallel, at least consistent geometry at the point of the joinery is pretty damn important if the legs are going to stand correctly.

... and they ain't NO way in hell you can guarantee consistent geometry, of any part, or from part to part, after a SINGLE pass over jointer blades!

Reply to
Swingman

What I was taught for squaring leg stock, after rough cutting, was to flatten first face, then joint an adjacent second face square and true and finally plane the other surfaces parallel and square.. If you have a decent tablesaw that is decently tuned and has a sharp blade, there's no reason really that you can't substitute the table saw for the planer cuts. In fact on some woods with difficult grain, I think you sometimes can actually avoid tearout and get a smoother surface using a table saw over the planer.

Reply to
Jim Hall

Of course, I'm assuming the legs are thin enough to rip on a table saw; otherwise, obviously that won't be a solution for you.. Good luck..

Reply to
Jim Hall

Gosh, after re-reading my message, I may have not been clear. You flatten the first face on the jointer..

Reply to
Jim Hall

No fence on your jointer?

Seriously, I agree that the thickness planer is the right tool for the job. I would remove bulk with a saw if it were any more than 3/16ths being removed.

But the reaction against the jointer (which is NOT the best tool for the job) may be overstated. If I didn't have a planer, I would scribe the desired thickness, run it twice over the jointer with the table set to get a cut of a little less than 3/32. Then observe how close to the scribe line I was getting at all points, set the jointer for superfine cut, and sneak up on the scribe line. If one part of the cut neared the scribe line before another, I'd know that my technique or jointer was off, and would switch to a hand plane for the last few thou.

Or cut it the right size to begin with, but where's the fun in that?

Reply to
alexy

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.