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
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.)
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
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 . . .
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
It is better for you to be a troll than the obvious alternative.
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
A.M. Wood (Morning)
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
My jointer gave good results when I bought it, so I have never bothered to
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.
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.
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.
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...
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
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.
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
In summary I demand the very best from myself and my tools.
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
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.
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.