After I finish a bowl there is a huge pile of
shavings...they work great as mulch on the floor of my small
hobby greenhouse, but I have more mulch than I have
greenhouse. So I think I need a bowl saver. The question
is, which is the best system?

Thanking you in advance for your opinions,

Lem Bledsoe

I own a kelton bowl saver, I do like it very much, I don't get to use
it as much as I would like to. I've also used the one made by wood-cut
tools. Both are nice, wood-cut doesn't have the versatility. Differen't
shapes, vase saves, and deep parting are keltons domain, even when
compared to the oneway version. The instructions suck to the point of
being wrong, Mike Mahoney's video made a difference. By all means, ask
away about either of the two systems I've used.

The answer depends on a few things. What kind of a lathe do you have?
How much hp motor? What will you be coring?

I have all three systems, McNaughton, Oneway, and Woodcut. They all
work and work well.

The McNaughton has a learning curve. You are the pilot, and have to aim
where you want to be. Since the blade isn't on a pivoting point, then
it won't always go where you want it to. Given the choice of having
only one of the 3 systems, I would choose this one. It is faster (at
least for me) and you can core any shape except for the inside of a
hollow form with it. You don't need all of the blades that come with
the system. You can't see the blade as it cuts, and sometimes you will
go through the bottom. They now have a laser pointer that goes with
their system. It hasn't improved my aim, but I can see when it is off,
and correct. I can now aim deeper rather than usually aiming shallow so
that I won't make another lamp shade. This system mounts on the banjo.
If you do get this one, try to find someone who has it and knows how to
make it work.

The Oneway is the most expensive of the 3. I prefer it for the largest
cores that I do. You do have to stop the lathe a few times during each
core to advance the support finger, but the support finger is what
makes it so steady. This is also a reason why this one is the slowest
of the 3 for me. The cutters are a pain to sharpen. You have to take it
off the blade and hold it up to the grinder, or they have a nice little
jig to put the cutter in so that you don't have to hold it in your
fingers. This system mounts on a metal plate which tightens with a
wrench and bolt.

The Woodcut is a nice little system. Note that I said little. The big
blade is about a 5 inch radius. You can core bigger than a 10 inch
diameter blank, but the bottom will be slightly concave. Not a big
problem, but you can loose a little depth. The major draw back to me is
that you need to have the tailstock on the lathe for this one. I never
use the tailstock when turning or coring bowls. It does chatter a bit
on harder woods, but that isn't a drawback.

You need at least a 1 hp motor, and that is stretching it a bit. All of
the blades remove about a 3/8 inch wide kerf, so if you can remove a
cut like that, you can core. The exception here is the McNaughton mini
set. They are about 1/4 inch wide, and work the easiest of the systems.

If you come to the AAW Symposium in Portland next summer, I will be
demoing all 3 systems. I will also be doing a DVD on using the
McNaughton system. If you have any other questions, let me know. I do
have a number of other posts no this and other chat groups about the
McNaughton and other coring systems.

There are claims that they will reduce the amount of shavings on your
floor. I think this is debatable. The coring systems make the whole
process faster, especially on shaping the outside of the cored piece
because most of the work is already done. This leaves more time for
turning, and I turn more bowls so have more shavings.

robo hippy
wrote:
I own a kelton bowl saver, I do like it very much, I don't get to use
it as much as I would like to. I've also used the one made by wood-cut
tools. Both are nice, wood-cut doesn't have the versatility. Differen't
shapes, vase saves, and deep parting are keltons domain, even when
compared to the oneway version. The instructions suck to the point of
being wrong, Mike Mahoney's video made a difference. By all means, ask
away about either of the two systems I've used.