>> I'm impressed it's got to be harder to duplicate an existing chair
>> then to design and build. You loose the there no such thing as an
>> error only a design modification factor.8-)
>
> You got that right.
>
> And it's much harder to duplicate a poorly made chair, than one that's
> properly made using traditional joinery and techniques.
>
> The chair being duplicated is a factory made "furniture store" chair, and
> the "joinery" is comprised of dowels, staples and lag bolts (I'm not
> kidding about the lag bolts, used on the corner braces to add support to
> the back legs ... and with that half circle back leg, it might not be all
> that bad of an idea).
>
> It is apparent that the way the original chair is put together in the
> factory is an expedient based on the design itself. The curves and
> multiple compound angles require more precision than can be generally
> done cost effectively in a lower end factory product, therefore the
> choice of expedient "joinery".
>
> In the two reproduction chairs, the client is getting a product made with
> traditional methods, that faithfully implements the design in all
> aspects, although in this day and age it is all about appearance, and
> nothing else seems to matter.
>
> IOW, and once again, guilty as charged ... putting $$$ (time/effort) into
> a product where it can't be seen. ;)
I know that the client is suppose to do the finishing herself, possibly, and may be the seat. You should epoxy a plexiglas plate in the seat position so that the joinery is visible to all, like it or not. LOL