I came across a number of decent size logs this summer and would like to
save as much as I can for bowls. I'm considering one of those coreing
systems (like McNaughton) but wonder which would be the best for my Jet 1236
lathe.

Anyone have any experience in using them on this size lathe. Some of the
descriptions suggest they are better with a bigger more powerful lathe.

Thanks for comments,

Tom in Howell, NJ

Hello Tom,

The McNaughton coring system would not likely work on your lathe because of lack
of power. Several years ago, I was considering the purchase of a coring system.
At the time, I had a Record CL-3 with a 3/4 hp motor. Having watched a
McNaughton system being demonstrated on a lathe with only one horsepower, I
ruled out the McNaughton for my lathe. I did have a chance to watch a Woodcut
system being used at the AAW Symposium in San Antonio, Texas and felt that it
would work on my lathe. It did work and I still use it regularly. All of them
are best when used with wet wood. I recently rough turned and cored eight maple
10 inch bowl blanks in one afternoon with the Woodcut system, they were wet.
Then this week, I cored a dry elm 12" bowl blank that was dry. It was not an
easy task, but the coring system did work.

Fred Holder
http://www.fholder.com

In article , Tom Puskar says...

I came across a number of decent size logs this summer and would like to
save as much as I can for bowls. I'm considering one of those coreing
systems (like McNaughton) but wonder which would be the best for my Jet 1236
lathe.

Anyone have any experience in using them on this size lathe. Some of the
descriptions suggest they are better with a bigger more powerful lathe.

Thanks for comments,

Tom in Howell, NJ

On Thu, 27 Oct 2005 19:10:13 -0400, "Tom Puskar" wrote:

I came across a number of decent size logs this summer and would like to
save as much as I can for bowls. I'm considering one of those coreing
systems (like McNaughton) but wonder which would be the best for my Jet 1236
lathe.

Anyone have any experience in using them on this size lathe. Some of the
descriptions suggest they are better with a bigger more powerful lathe.

Thanks for comments,

Tom in Howell, NJ

I use the McNaughton and will probably like it a lot more once I learn not to
make funnels with it.. *g*

2 excellent sources here on the wRECk that helped me a lot were Robohippy and
Bill Grumbine.. they both use the McNaughton, so they may not be objective..
http://www.enter.net/~ultradad/index.html

It's not as easy as any of the systems make it look, but I've talked to several
folks that use coring systems and have good results..
Their opinion of McNaughton vs. Oneway was that the Oneway was a little easier
to use but more production oriented, while the McNaughton allowed a little more
creativity and flexibility...
The flexibility part might be my problem, coupled with not having the patience
to practice more..
I don't know if Oneway has a video, but if you get the McNaughton, pick up Mike
Mahoney's DVD... it's not nearly as instructive as Bill's bowl turning DVD, but
until Robohippy makes a video, it's the only game in town..
We bought the McNaughton at Lee Valley http://tinyurl.com/dafbx
and they also had Mike's DVD.. YMMV




mac

Please remove splinters before emailing

Tom,
The McNaughton will work with the 12 inch lathes. It isn't as much a
question of horse power, but cutter size. How big of a kerf do you take
when you are hogging out material? There are 3 different knife sets.
The micro set (about 1/4 inch kerf) will work easily with your lathe as
it has the smallest cutterheads. The medium set of blades takes about a
1/2 inch kerf cut, and can work, but if you are aggressive with it, it
will stall your motor. On my PM 3520 with a 2 horse motor, I can make
the belt slip when I push it.I read that Oneway now makes a set for
their 12 inch lathe. One thing to make sure of is that the tool rest
will fit. I went to do a demo for the Salem, OR club and they have a 12
by 36 or so Oneway, and with the toolrest sitting all the way down on
the banjo, the cutter point was considerably above center. You most
likely can get almost all of the cores you want with the micro set
cutters. I almost never use the straight blades. On my PM 3520 I almost
never use the big set of blades. They are intended for bowls over 16
inches, and that seems to be more of a specialty market to me.
robo hippy

I used both the McNaughton and the Woodcut on my Jet 1236 when I had it. It
was an older McNaughton setup, so I am sure the cutters were not the small
ones that are now available. Both systems worked, but I preferred the
McNaughton, because it permits greater flexibility in the shape of the
bowls. The Woodcut is more secure, permitting a beginner to use it more
easily.

The McNaughton is really designed for lathes with more power. The Jet, with
its variable pulleys is very prone to slipping. When the lathe stalls,
there is likely to be damage to the belt, resulting in breakage, maybe a
week later.

Regarding the problem of making "funnels," referred to by Mac Davis--The
Woodcut doesn't have this problem, because the arc of the cutter is set in
advance, and checked with a pair of dividers. If you follow instructions,
you will not go through the bottom.

With the McNaughton, it's hard to be sure how close to the bottom of the
blank you are as you complete the cut. If you play it safe, and leave the
bottom fairly thick, you get fewer bowls. If you try to get more bowls by
making the bottoms thinner, it's easy to go through and get a "funnel."

HOW I SOLVED THE PROBLEM: I attached a laser pointer to the handle, where
the blade clamps in. This is patterned after the laser system described on
Kevin Neeley's website. It uses flexible plastic ball and socket tubing,
which allows me to point the red spot right at the tip of the cutter. While
I am coring, I can judge where the cut is going, and avoid going out the
bottom, while still making the bottom reasonably thin.

Leo,
The older blades had the same amount of cutting surface, but were wider
that the blade only on the outside of the blade. When you made a cut,
the blade actually rode on the inside of the kerf. The newer ones are
spear shaped and are wider than the blade on both sides, so that the
blade now centers in the kerf. I would suggest that you get the newer
blades. I got one and it worked so much better that I replaced all of
my blades. They now have a mini set which are great for the last core
or two.

Do you have any pictures of the lazer set up that you use? I have heard
of them, but haven't seen them.

Thanks,
robo hippy

the Mahoney video shows how to regrind the older blades making them
similar to the older blades. I consider the video a must for anyone
using the system.

I've also made my share of funnels with the keltons. This is not the
fault of the system. I like the idea of attaching a laser pointer. I
have the kelton laser rig and love it (saves a tremedous amount of time
in hollowing out a vase) but I don't think it will attach to the center
savers. What kind of laser rig are you using?

robo hippy wrote:
Leo,
The older blades had the same amount of cutting surface, but were wider
that the blade only on the outside of the blade. When you made a cut,
the blade actually rode on the inside of the kerf. The newer ones are
spear shaped and are wider than the blade on both sides, so that the
blade now centers in the kerf. I would suggest that you get the newer
blades. I got one and it worked so much better that I replaced all of
my blades. They now have a mini set which are great for the last core
or two.

Do you have any pictures of the lazer set up that you use? I have heard
of them, but haven't seen them.

Thanks,
robo hippy

"william kossack" wrote: (clip) I like the idea of attaching a laser
pointer. I have the kelton laser rig and love it (saves a tremedous amount
of time in hollowing out a vase) but I don't think it will attach to the
center savers. What kind of laser rig are you using? (clip)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
It is described on Kevin Neely's website, "Kevin's Woodturnings. Go to
"Segmented turning," and then "Laser wall thickness gauge." He shows it on
a hollowing tool. My application requires that you modify the attachment to
make it fit the hollowing tool handle. The way it works: the arm is made
from a flexible plastic ball-and-socket oil line, that is commonly used to
deliver cooling oil on machine tools. It is set up so that the laser points
to the tip of the coring blade, so that while you are parting out a bowl
blank, you can see, on the outside of the spinning wood, exactly where the
tip is, in relation to the bottom, and how close you are to finishing the
cut.

There is a point where it is smart to stop and break out the cored blank.
If you stop too soon, this will be difficult.

William, I can't remember the details of the Kelton laser rig, but it might
to be possible to adapt it to fit the coring handle, and you'll be home
free.

While we're on the subject, I also have a laser mounted to the back of my
headstock on a set of adjustable arms. I find it valuable for centering my
work, and for numerous other uses, but this post is already too long.

Thinking about this some more I think the kelton laser might work. At
least the cutters should fit into the rig but would the rig permit an
angle for hollowing.

However, my lathe has a headstock that will pivot.

All I need is the time to try it between other projects

Leo Lichtman wrote:
"william kossack" wrote: (clip) I like the idea of attaching a laser
pointer. I have the kelton laser rig and love it (saves a tremedous amount
of time in hollowing out a vase) but I don't think it will attach to the
center savers. What kind of laser rig are you using? (clip)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
It is described on Kevin Neely's website, "Kevin's Woodturnings. Go to
"Segmented turning," and then "Laser wall thickness gauge." He shows it on
a hollowing tool. My application requires that you modify the attachment to
make it fit the hollowing tool handle. The way it works: the arm is made
from a flexible plastic ball-and-socket oil line, that is commonly used to
deliver cooling oil on machine tools. It is set up so that the laser points
to the tip of the coring blade, so that while you are parting out a bowl
blank, you can see, on the outside of the spinning wood, exactly where the
tip is, in relation to the bottom, and how close you are to finishing the
cut.

There is a point where it is smart to stop and break out the cored blank.
If you stop too soon, this will be difficult.

Well, you can regrind the shape of the cutter, but that doesn't change
the position of the cutter on the blade, and that is a big difference!
I experimented with all sorts of profiles on the cutter, and found out
that it makes no difference on how it cuts, or how it tracks (follows
an intended path as the cut progresses). I tried it with a bevel to the
outside (which is the way the old style came), a bevel to the inside,
square, and spear point, They all cut the same. The only modification
that I have make now is to grind the spear point off. On the medium set
of blades, this changes the width of the shavings coming out from 1/2
inch down to 3/8 inch. It is all about reducing pressure. This is not
recommended by McNaughton, but it works for me. With the old blades, I
ground the ear off, so that the cutter was the same width as the blade.
I would have to take 2 full kerfs during the core, but there was a lot
less pressure on the blade (the difference between taking a 3/16 cut
and taking a 1/2 inch cut).
robo hippy

I have a DVD and a CD video showing step by step bowlcoring from start to
finnish. This comes packed with the Woodcut system. If anyone wants a CD
free of charge please write me an email care of my website and I will send
it free of charge.
Ken Port
www.woodcut-tools.com


"robo hippy" wrote in message
ups.com...
Well, you can regrind the shape of the cutter, but that doesn't change
the position of the cutter on the blade, and that is a big difference!
I experimented with all sorts of profiles on the cutter, and found out
that it makes no difference on how it cuts, or how it tracks (follows
an intended path as the cut progresses). I tried it with a bevel to the
outside (which is the way the old style came), a bevel to the inside,
square, and spear point, They all cut the same. The only modification
that I have make now is to grind the spear point off. On the medium set
of blades, this changes the width of the shavings coming out from 1/2
inch down to 3/8 inch. It is all about reducing pressure. This is not
recommended by McNaughton, but it works for me. With the old blades, I
ground the ear off, so that the cutter was the same width as the blade.
I would have to take 2 full kerfs during the core, but there was a lot
less pressure on the blade (the difference between taking a 3/16 cut
and taking a 1/2 inch cut).
robo hippy

Snipped SPAM
**** Off Ken

. wrote:
Snipped SPAM
**** Off Ken

Why don't you grow up! If you have a problem with Ken, take him to
court. Otherwise, please don't make the rest of us suffer through
another of your harangues each time he posts.