On 2007-06-01 17:44:46 +0100, Peter Lynch said:

On Fri, 1 Jun 2007 17:08:36 +0100, Andy Hall wrote:
On 2007-06-01 16:09:16 +0100, "George" said:


"Andy Hall" wrote in message
...
On 2007-05-31 22:05:39 +0100, "Arthur" said:

Might do someone.
Challenge Xtreme 1500W 1/2in Plunge Router £27.49


Arthur

For doing what? Far too fast for stirring paint unless your name is
Bean.



Oh come now MrHall if the tool is for the occasional use it is worth the
money the only time a more expensive router should be bought is...when it
has to earn its keep.

No. Again. The amount of use is not really the issue - it's the
quality of the result required and the price than one is willing to pay
for that.

I would suggest that the quality of the final result is only partially
determined by the quality of the tools used. A big factor is the
experience of the user.
If they don't use a router (or any other tool) regularly, the end result
will be of a lower standard than from someone, like a professional, who
uses that tool 8 hours a day, 5 days a week.

To some extent that may be true, but for most woodworking power tools
the issue is much closer to one of learning to ride a bike. In other
words, once the techniques have been learned, often through trial and
error, they are not forgotten - for example in the case of a router how
the work is supported and the machine held and run.

This may take some practice and hence an investment in time, but I
don't buy the argument that regular use is required to develop and
maintain skill level. It isn't athletics.



In that case, where there's
an upper limit on the "quality" of work produced, it makes good financial
sense to use a standard of tool that is commensurate with the skill of
the user.

I think that there is a degree of truth in that but that it relates
much more to hand tools or the combination of hand tools with a machine
(e.g. woodturning lathe).