I already get Wood, Fine Woodworking, & American Woodworker. Is WWJ a
fine addition to those, or an also-ran. I'm sure I've seen it once or
twice a the newstand, but can't recall it. I'm staring at a
subscription offer that came in the mail, for $12.97 for a year. Thumbs
up or down?

Dave

David wrote:

I already get Wood, Fine Woodworking, & American Woodworker. Is WWJ a
fine addition to those, or an also-ran. I'm sure I've seen it once or
twice a the newstand, but can't recall it. I'm staring at a
subscription offer that came in the mail, for $12.97 for a year. Thumbs
up or down?

Dave

Dave I like it better than American Woodworker, which I am not going to
renew in 2009 when the subscription runs out. It is about on par with Wood
and at $12.97 a year . . .

Deb

In article , David wrote:
I already get Wood, Fine Woodworking, & American Woodworker. Is WWJ a
fine addition to those, or an also-ran. I'm sure I've seen it once or
twice a the newstand, but can't recall it. I'm staring at a
subscription offer that came in the mail, for $12.97 for a year. Thumbs
up or down?

If I were going to add another magazine to that list, it would be Popular
Woodworking and not WWJ. Price is higher, but worth it IMHO.

It seems to me that AWW and WWJ are written at a similar level for similar
audiences, and I can't see getting both. Furthermore, the advertising density
in WWJ is a bit higher than I care for.

Also, in case you don't know, it's published by Rockler. Not that that's a bad
thing, you understand, but their editorial positions and tool recommendatoins
are not necessarily completely objective. [Possibly those of other mags aren't
either, e.g. it appears that some product reviews in a certain magazine whose
name is only one WOrD long may be biased in favor of certain manufacturers who
advertise therein, but that's another story.]

I wouldn't bother. I used to subscribe, but I let it run out without renewing.
Ditto AWW, actually. I'm pretty happy with the mix I have now: Wood, FWW, and
PWW.


--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

Nobody ever left footprints in the sands of time by sitting on his butt.
And who wants to leave buttprints in the sands of time?

Thanks for the heads up Rockler, Doug. I'd doubt they could be
completely unbiased when it came to some tool reviews. I just dug up an
issue (I didn't think I had any in the house when I posted the thread)
from 2002. It doesn't have much in it's 94 pages. hmm...only 6 issues
per year. Now it doesn't sound so great.

Let's see what others have to say about it...

Dave

Doug Miller wrote:

In article , David wrote:

I already get Wood, Fine Woodworking, & American Woodworker. Is WWJ a
fine addition to those, or an also-ran. I'm sure I've seen it once or
twice a the newstand, but can't recall it. I'm staring at a
subscription offer that came in the mail, for $12.97 for a year. Thumbs
up or down?


If I were going to add another magazine to that list, it would be Popular
Woodworking and not WWJ. Price is higher, but worth it IMHO.

It seems to me that AWW and WWJ are written at a similar level for similar
audiences, and I can't see getting both. Furthermore, the advertising density
in WWJ is a bit higher than I care for.

Also, in case you don't know, it's published by Rockler. Not that that's a bad
thing, you understand, but their editorial positions and tool recommendatoins
are not necessarily completely objective. [Possibly those of other mags aren't
either, e.g. it appears that some product reviews in a certain magazine whose
name is only one WOrD long may be biased in favor of certain manufacturers who
advertise therein, but that's another story.]

I wouldn't bother. I used to subscribe, but I let it run out without renewing.
Ditto AWW, actually. I'm pretty happy with the mix I have now: Wood, FWW, and
PWW.


--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

Nobody ever left footprints in the sands of time by sitting on his butt.
And who wants to leave buttprints in the sands of time?

I find FWW a good mag, but I did not renew AWW. I also like Workbench.

"David" wrote in message
...
Thanks for the heads up Rockler, Doug. I'd doubt they could be
completely unbiased when it came to some tool reviews. I just dug up an
issue (I didn't think I had any in the house when I posted the thread)
from 2002. It doesn't have much in it's 94 pages. hmm...only 6 issues
per year. Now it doesn't sound so great.

Let's see what others have to say about it...

Dave

Doug Miller wrote:

In article , David
wrote:

I already get Wood, Fine Woodworking, & American Woodworker. Is WWJ a
fine addition to those, or an also-ran. I'm sure I've seen it once or
twice a the newstand, but can't recall it. I'm staring at a
subscription offer that came in the mail, for $12.97 for a year. Thumbs
up or down?


If I were going to add another magazine to that list, it would be
Popular
Woodworking and not WWJ. Price is higher, but worth it IMHO.

It seems to me that AWW and WWJ are written at a similar level for
similar
audiences, and I can't see getting both. Furthermore, the advertising
density
in WWJ is a bit higher than I care for.

Also, in case you don't know, it's published by Rockler. Not that that's
a bad
thing, you understand, but their editorial positions and tool
recommendatoins
are not necessarily completely objective. [Possibly those of other mags
aren't
either, e.g. it appears that some product reviews in a certain magazine
whose
name is only one WOrD long may be biased in favor of certain
manufacturers who
advertise therein, but that's another story.]

I wouldn't bother. I used to subscribe, but I let it run out without
renewing.
Ditto AWW, actually. I'm pretty happy with the mix I have now: Wood,
FWW, and
PWW.


--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

Nobody ever left footprints in the sands of time by sitting on his butt.
And who wants to leave buttprints in the sands of time?

If I were going to add another magazine to that list, it would be
Popular
Woodworking and not WWJ. Price is higher, but worth it IMHO.
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)


I second that motion!

Ronnie Aldrich
Trussville, Alabama

I don't know how experienced you are but for the beginner/intermediate
woodworker I don't think that woodsmith can be beaten. No Ads, good
plans and good tips/tricks. It is not as longs as some others but it is
almost always useful stuff. Shopnotes is the same family but I haven't
found it to be as good personally.
W

Doug Miller wrote:
In article , David
wrote:
I already get Wood, Fine Woodworking, & American Woodworker. Is WWJ
a
fine addition to those, or an also-ran. I'm sure I've seen it once
or
twice a the newstand, but can't recall it. I'm staring at a
subscription offer that came in the mail, for $12.97 for a year.
Thumbs
up or down?

If I were going to add another magazine to that list, it would be
Popular
Woodworking and not WWJ. Price is higher, but worth it IMHO.


Also, in case you don't know, it's published by Rockler. Not that
that's a bad
thing, you understand, but their editorial positions and tool
recommendatoins
are not necessarily completely objective. [Possibly those of other
mags aren't
either, e.g. it appears that some product reviews in a certain
magazine whose
name is only one WOrD long may be biased in favor of certain
manufacturers who
advertise therein, but that's another story.]

Over the years, I've done a LOT of tool tests for WWJ. At no time, not
once, not ever, did Rob so much as suggest I should favor one tool over
another.

No tool test is totally objective. If it were, no one would read it.
Nothing but figures, no interpretations and feelings about how the tool
handles or works or anything else. Basically, you could do that sort of
thing with a spec sheet, a series of measurements (run-out, etc.) and
12 photos and let the reader do his own interpretation. That's not a
bad idea for the highly experienced reader. It is pure BS for the less
experienced reader.

But, in fact, I've done reviews for several magazines, and no editor
has asked for a slant to one brand or another, except when I left out a
manufacturer or two--and that usually occurs when the manufacturer or
its rep is simply too busy or too something to respond to requests for
info and tools.

In article .com, "Charlie Self" wrote:

Over the years, I've done a LOT of tool tests for WWJ. At no time, not
once, not ever, did Rob so much as suggest I should favor one tool over
another.

I didn't mean to suggest that there might be such flagrant bias as that.
Something rather more subtle, perhaps: if WWJ runs an article comparing
different brands of router bits, for instance, I imagine that Rockler's bits
would be evaluated, but I very much doubt that Woodcraft's would be.

--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

Nobody ever left footprints in the sands of time by sitting on his butt.
And who wants to leave buttprints in the sands of time?

David wrote in :

I already get Wood, Fine Woodworking, & American Woodworker. Is WWJ a
fine addition to those, or an also-ran. I'm sure I've seen it once or
twice a the newstand, but can't recall it. I'm staring at a
subscription offer that came in the mail, for $12.97 for a year. Thumbs
up or down?

Dave

Down. And in my opinion, Wood and American Woodworker offer me little of
interest. YMMV.

I look forward to Woodwork, and recently, Popular Woodworking. Somewhat
less so to FWW. WWJ won't get renewed. Neither will ShopNotes. I haven't
decided yet on Woodsmith.

Patriarch

I think what distinguishes WWJ from the rest of the pack is that it has some
damn fine articles about the craftsman, the artisan's and the visionaries in
the field of woodworking. Definitely not a how-to magazine even though on
occasion there have been articles that show how a piece was made but you
couldn't make it from the article - if that makes sense.

As I recall Doug Stowe (http://www.dougstowe.com ) was/is a contributing
editor. He used to contribute here quite a bit but drifted off due most
likely to a heavy schedule with a school program he was putting together -
"The Wisdom of the Hands". See his site for more info.

If you want to round out your woodworking knowledge and go beyond tool
reviews and how to make pointy sticks - WWJ is an excellent choice.

Bob S.



"David" wrote in message
...
I already get Wood, Fine Woodworking, & American Woodworker. Is WWJ a fine
addition to those, or an also-ran. I'm sure I've seen it once or twice a
the newstand, but can't recall it. I'm staring at a subscription offer
that came in the mail, for $12.97 for a year. Thumbs up or down?

Dave

Hi Dave,

Have FWW for 10+ years, Wood for 15+ years,
WWJ for 6+ years. Just started "Shopnotes" a
few months ago cause it looked a little different.
Also TOH magazine 5+yrs which is pretty bad, but SWMBO
likes it - not a WW mag anyhow - I like keeping Russ
& the boys in champagne I guess!

Some months are better than others.

Once I start, I can't stop! I'm afraid that I will
miss a great tip/plan/tool review...

If you step back and think about it, a 1 yr subscription
to most of these costs about the same as 2 bf of red oak.

If they get political, I back off, but most stick to woodworking
most of the time, so I'm pretty satisfied.

FWIW.

Lou

In article , David
wrote:

I already get Wood, Fine Woodworking, & American Woodworker. Is WWJ a
fine addition to those, or an also-ran. I'm sure I've seen it once or
twice a the newstand, but can't recall it. I'm staring at a
subscription offer that came in the mail, for $12.97 for a year. Thumbs
up or down?

Dave

"David" wrote in message
...
Thanks for the heads up Rockler, Doug. I'd doubt they could be
completely unbiased when it came to some tool reviews. I just dug up an
issue (I didn't think I had any in the house when I posted the thread)
from 2002. It doesn't have much in it's 94 pages. hmm...only 6 issues
per year. Now it doesn't sound so great.

Let's see what others have to say about it...

One positive note, when they have a project, they tell you what Rockler
hardware you need so you don't have to search obscure items. I made a
circle cutting jig they featured

Certainly not the best, but it has had a few good articles. More of a pinkie
up than thumb up.

I think what distinguishes WWJ from the rest of the pack is that it has
some
damn fine articles about the craftsman, the artisan's and the visionaries in
the field of woodworking. Definitely not a how-to magazine even though on
occasion there have been articles that show how a piece was made but you
couldn't make it from the article - if that makes sense.

Shameless plug he The current issue of Woodcraft Magazine features a
cover story, as well as a sidebar or two, on Sam Maloof. (The first issue
had a feature on David Marks. And I'm sure they'll get around to Norm,
too.) It also has 3 or 4 project articles that do supply sufficient
information (instructions, illustrations, cut lists, hardware sources. etc.)
should you wish to try your hand at building one. And now for the shameless
plug part. I wrote one of the tool reviews and I can tell you that at no
time was I given any instruction, explicit or otherwise, as to whether to
give a thumbs-up or thumbs-down. In fact, I don't know for sure whether
Woodcraft even carries the tool I reviewed, although I imagine they do. But
either way, it has no bearing on what I write or what I am asked to write.
For my next review I was offered a choice between two tools, one of which I
know for certain is not currently sold by Woodcraft nor will it be in the
future.

Lee


--
To e-mail, replace "bucketofspam" with "dleegordon"

Doug Miller wrote:
In article .com,
"Charlie Self" wrote:

Over the years, I've done a LOT of tool tests for WWJ. At no time,
not
once, not ever, did Rob so much as suggest I should favor one tool
over
another.

I didn't mean to suggest that there might be such flagrant bias as
that.
Something rather more subtle, perhaps: if WWJ runs an article
comparing
different brands of router bits, for instance, I imagine that
Rockler's bits
would be evaluated, but I very much doubt that Woodcraft's would be.

If I were setting up a router bit test, I'd leave both out. Reason:
they are usually offshore contracted tools and the purchaser has no way
of knowing who made what when. The bits you get this week might be
wonderful. Next week's bits may come from another small factory and be
worthless or nearly so.

On 20 Apr 2005 15:22:19 -0700, "hikinandbikin"
wrote:

I don't know how experienced you are but for the beginner/intermediate
woodworker I don't think that woodsmith can be beaten. No Ads, good
plans and good tips/tricks. It is not as longs as some others but it is
almost always useful stuff. Shopnotes is the same family but I haven't
found it to be as good personally.

They've got a nice "book of the month" sort of thing as well. I
checked most of them out, and Woodsmith it the only one I've kept a
subscription to. Couldn't see the point in having more than one-
after all, a guy can only read so many articles about tuning up your
hand plane or the secret to perfect mitered corners.
Aut inveniam viam aut faciam

Funny, I just trashed the renewal coupon for WWJ ten minutes before reading
this thread. I guess that's a THUMBS DOWN. I agree that the ads are
overwhelming at times. I do like AWW, Wood, Shopnotes & Woodsmith.

"David" wrote in message
...
I already get Wood, Fine Woodworking, & American Woodworker. Is WWJ a fine
addition to those, or an also-ran. I'm sure I've seen it once or twice a
the newstand, but can't recall it. I'm staring at a subscription offer
that came in the mail, for $12.97 for a year. Thumbs up or down?

Dave

Lee Gordon wrote:
I wrote one of the tool reviews [for Woodcraft Magazine] and I can
tell you that at no
time was I given any instruction, explicit or otherwise, as to
whether to
give a thumbs-up or thumbs-down. In fact, I don't know for sure
whether
Woodcraft even carries the tool I reviewed, although I imagine they
do. But
either way, it has no bearing on what I write or what I am asked to
write.
For my next review I was offered a choice between two tools, one of
which I
know for certain is not currently sold by Woodcraft nor will it be in
the
future.

Lee is correct. The review he referenced was for the new DeWalt
cordless nailers in the May issue. I think the nailers may be carried
at a handful of Woodcraft stores, but not in their catalog (notice I
said "their catalog," not "our catalog" -- we are separate from
retail). Since I know Lee well, I gave him a choice of tools to review
-- a Milwaukee 28-volt combo kit, and a pair of Ridgid cordless tools.
The former is not currently available at the Woodcraft stores nor in
the catalog, although I suppose it could be eventually. Obviously, the
Ridgid tools will never be available anywhere but at HD.

Charlie up-topic spoke about the reviews he's done, and he is also
correct. Editors do not give instructions on how to do reviews (other
than style directions) to reviewers. Charlie, Lee and any reviewers
worth their salt would refuse to do an article under such
circumstances. If I were ever told to do review products in the
magazine in such a way as to please retail, I would likewise refuse. I
said up front when I took this job that I wouldn't do that, and to
date, I've never been asked to do so.

Tool reviewing is very difficult for WW magazines, especially those
like WWJ and us, who are associated with retail organizations. Both
Rockler and Woodcraft Supply carry just about all the name brands ---
every time we review a tool carried by Woodcraft Supply (and I assume
it's the same for Rob with WWJ and Rockler), we get accusations that
we're doing so because the retail counterpart carries it. Nonsense.
To avoid this, we'd have to ignore every new tool issued by DeWalt,
Delta, Jet, Powermatic, Porter-Cable, and etc & etc. We can't do that
and still serve the reader.

It's also difficult for all the other magazines, who are in no way
associated with retail organizations. Because every manufacturer
advertises in every magazine, it's almost impossible NOT to review a
tool that's advertised. In those cases, it's a tightrope walk: Say
anything at all bad about a tool, and you anger the advertiser; say
anything good, and you're accused of pandering to an advertiser. You
won't convince everyone by trying to please everyone, so it's easier
just to do the review the way it should be done, and let everyone --
advertiser and reader alike -- infer what they may.

For what it's worth, I get a lot of complaints from the stores that
non-store tools are shown in reviews (and in-use in the project
articles). I suppose there are far more complaints from the stores
that go to the franchise director and other folks in corporate that I
never even see. Which is fine with me, since I'd ignore them anyway.

And, as long as I'm on the subject, I do other things to separate
Woodcraft-the-magazine from Woodcraft-the-retailer. I don't go to the
weekly product meetings, for example, even though that would be useful.
When I get freelance articles whose writers have mentioned
Woodcraft-the-retailer (and many do, thinking, I suppose, they have a
better chance of selling an article), I remove the references unless
they are germain to the text; they rarely are. Whenever in
conversation someone mentions a product that "I" carry, I'm quick to
point out that I have no idea what "they" carry. We are separate, in a
separate building, with a separate address, and a separate agenda.
Sure, there's some overlap here and there; there has to be in a
corporate sense. But it's so little that I have no discomfort at all.

A.J.

After careful consideration of all your responses, I'll toss the
subscription form in the round file. Thanks for all the comments,
fellas. (As I mentioned earlier, I found a copy of WWJ AFTER I'd posted
my question here. I wasn't too impressed with it's content and it's
only 6 issues per year.)

Dave

David wrote:

I already get Wood, Fine Woodworking, & American Woodworker. Is WWJ a
fine addition to those, or an also-ran. I'm sure I've seen it once or
twice a the newstand, but can't recall it. I'm staring at a
subscription offer that came in the mail, for $12.97 for a year. Thumbs
up or down?

Dave

Charlie,

Do you know if that's also true of LV's router bits?

Thanks,
Chris

Charlie Self wrote:
Doug Miller wrote:
if WWJ runs an article comparing
different brands of router bits, for instance, I imagine that
Rockler's bits
would be evaluated, but I very much doubt that Woodcraft's would
be.

If I were setting up a router bit test, I'd leave both out. Reason:
they are usually offshore contracted tools and the purchaser has no
way
of knowing who made what when. The bits you get this week might be
wonderful. Next week's bits may come from another small factory and
be
worthless or nearly so.

"Charlie Self" wrote in message
oups.com...


SNIP

But, in fact, I've done reviews for several magazines, and no editor
has asked for a slant to one brand or another, except when I left out a
manufacturer or two--and that usually occurs when the manufacturer or
its rep is simply too busy or too something to respond to requests for
info and tools.

Charlie,

Just out of curiosity, in a tool-review-for-magazine situation, who decides
what vendors get represented? I have read reviews where I have thought
"So-and-so make this as well, I wonder why their version was not tested".
If it's a case that a vendor was contacted but declined to participate, then
I think that should be mentioned in the review.

Thanks,

Bill Leonhardt

Just out of curiosity, in a tool-review-for-magazine situation, who
decides
what vendors get represented? I have read reviews where I have thought
"So-and-so make this as well, I wonder why their version was not tested".
If it's a case that a vendor was contacted but declined to participate, then
I think that should be mentioned in the review.

Perhaps the most important factor in determining which tools get reviewed is
newness. If company "A" comes out with a new model or line of models,
especially if it has some new feature or features which differentiate it
from the rest of its category, it is a good candidate for review.
For example, let's say company "S" has had a table saw with a special
meat-cutting capability on the market for a year or two. Then, along comes
company "C" with a brand new meat-cutting table saw that is the first one to
come equipped with a bun storage drawer and mustard dispenser. Company
"C's" tool is more likely to get some ink because of its newness and its
uniqueness, while the company "S" tool was probably the beneficiary of the
media attention when it was the new kid on the block.

Lee


--
To e-mail, replace "bucketofspam" with "dleegordon"

"TheNewGuy" wrote in message
oups.com...
Charlie,

Do you know if that's also true of LV's router bits?

Thanks,
Chris

Charlie Self wrote:
Doug Miller wrote:
if WWJ runs an article comparing
different brands of router bits, for instance, I imagine that
Rockler's bits
would be evaluated, but I very much doubt that Woodcraft's would
be.

If I were setting up a router bit test, I'd leave both out. Reason:
they are usually offshore contracted tools and the purchaser has no
way
of knowing who made what when. The bits you get this week might be
wonderful. Next week's bits may come from another small factory and
be
worthless or nearly so.


Hi Chris -

I can answer that for you...

Our house brand bits are made in a Taiwan factory - and at the factory's
highest quality level. The plant can (and does) make at least 3 quality
levels (the lowest is called "America style") - and has a sister plant in
China...Many companies buy from them, and at differing quality levels.
Sometimes - companies buy the highest quality for open stock - but use the
lower quality for sets (to keep the prices competitive). The only way to
tell is to ask the vendor for the country of origin, and see if they'll
confirm the quality level.

We've been buying from the same place for at least a decade now...and
continue be be very happy with them.

Cheers -

Rob Lee
Lee Valley

"Lee Gordon" wrote in message
...
Just out of curiosity, in a tool-review-for-magazine situation, who
decides
what vendors get represented? I have read reviews where I have thought
"So-and-so make this as well, I wonder why their version was not tested".
If it's a case that a vendor was contacted but declined to participate,
then
I think that should be mentioned in the review.

Perhaps the most important factor in determining which tools get reviewed
is
newness. If company "A" comes out with a new model or line of models,
especially if it has some new feature or features which differentiate it
from the rest of its category, it is a good candidate for review.
For example, let's say company "S" has had a table saw with a special
meat-cutting capability on the market for a year or two. Then, along
comes
company "C" with a brand new meat-cutting table saw that is the first one
to
come equipped with a bun storage drawer and mustard dispenser. Company
"C's" tool is more likely to get some ink because of its newness and its
uniqueness, while the company "S" tool was probably the beneficiary of the
media attention when it was the new kid on the block.

Lee

I guess this may represent the "real world" somewhat but it doesn't address
what I think the reader needs. If I'm going to buy a meat cutting tablesaw,
then I'd like to know how all the models I could possibly buy compare to
each other. Wishful thinking on my part, perhaps.

I do find reviews useful, though, even if they don't cover all the models
I'd like them to consider. They:

1. Sometimes identify design considerations I hadn't appreciated.
2. Sometimes describe features I wasn't aware of and might find useful.

Bill

In article ,
"Robin Lee" wrote:

The plant can (and does) make at least 3 quality
levels (the lowest is called "America style"

Ouch - however, stereotypes aren't made up out of thin air.
--
Owen Lowe
The Fly-by-Night Copper Company
____

"I pledge allegiance to the flag of the
Corporate States of America and to the
Republicans for which it stands, one nation,
under debt, easily divisible, with liberty
and justice for oil."
- Wiley Miller, Non Sequitur, 1/24/05

Hi Robin,

Thanks for the reply - duh, should have asked you to start with

Do you know - and can you tell us - what distinquishes the different
quality levels at this factory?

Thanks,
Chris

Robin Lee wrote:

Our house brand bits are made in a Taiwan factory - and at the
factory's
highest quality level. The plant can (and does) make at least 3
quality
levels (the lowest is called "America style") - and has a sister
plant in
China...Many companies buy from them, and at differing quality
levels.
Sometimes - companies buy the highest quality for open stock - but
use the
lower quality for sets (to keep the prices competitive). The only way
to
tell is to ask the vendor for the country of origin, and see if
they'll
confirm the quality level.

We've been buying from the same place for at least a decade now...and
continue be be very happy with them.

Cheers -

Rob Lee
Lee Valley

I guess this may represent the "real world" somewhat but it doesn't
address
what I think the reader needs. If I'm going to buy a meat cutting tablesaw,
then I'd like to know how all the models I could possibly buy compare to
each other. Wishful thinking on my part, perhaps.

Sometimes you get a stand-alone review of a particular tool and sometimes
you get an article comparing various similar tools. And sometimes you get a
little of both. For example, in the March issue of Woodcraft Magazine,
there was a review of the Delta 36-716 table saw, which is Delta's first
entry into the new hybrid category of saws which have some features found in
contractors saws and some features from cabinet saws. That was a
full-fledged review but there was also a companion article to go with it.
AJ (the editor) owns one of the Jet hybrids and he knows I have a Craftsman.
So he picked my brain, spoke with someone else who has a DeWalt hybrid, and
drew upon his own experience with the Jet and wrote a sidebar to go along
with the Delta review. I think it provided quite a bit of useful
information without turning Woodcraft into Hybrid Table Saw Monthly.

Lee

--
To e-mail, replace "bucketofspam" with "dleegordon"