About 10 years ago my father (no longer with us) gave me an old
jointer. Made by National Woodenware Co. St. Thomas Ont. There is no
model #, it has three 4" blades and an "input" and an "output" table (
I hope these are the correct terms). Each table is adjustable for
height, but not straight up and down, but on an incline. I decided to
make this operational again and sent the blades for sharpening whilst
I made a small bench with wheels and mounted a motor and got it all
going okay. When I put the blades back in it and tried it a problem
arose (I don't know if its me or the machine, having never used a
jointer before). I adjusted the input table to take about 1/16 cut and
the output table to the same height (almost) as the blades. The blades
cut beautifully, but when putting a piece through the tables it is
obvious that the output table is not level with the other table, you
have to be very careful or the wood piece seems to drop down and then
take no cut off the wood right at the end. It seems like the output
table does not rise to in a level position, so that your piece of wood
will "rock" almost at the end. I don't know if I have adjusted the
tables incorrectly (although there is only on knob on each table) or
if the machine is out of wack. The cut from these new blades is very
nice and I have some upcoming projects that really would make use of
the jointer. I hope that I have explained this enough so that someone
who is familiar with jointers can maybe shed some light on this for me
or maybe offer some suggestions.
Tnx , Ken

wrote:

snip

I hope that I have explained this enough so that someone
who is familiar with jointers can maybe shed some light on this for me
or maybe offer some suggestions.

Hi Ken,

This may help:

http://www.woodcentral.com/bparticle...justment.shtml

--
Jack Novak
Buffalo, NY - USA

I hope that I have explained this enough so that someone
who is familiar with jointers can maybe shed some light on this for me
or maybe offer some suggestions.
Tnx , Ken

I don't know how old your machine is
but before you go to the trouble of
trying to fix anything else on it, make
sure the cutterhead runs in ball bearings
and isn't the old babbit type, with brass
shims.

Babbit bearings aren't that much of a problem. The only thing I would
really worry about is a square cutter head. They can be quite dangerous.
Babbit can run for many years if kept lubricated and can be re-poured.
--
Ross
www.myoldtools.com
"BUB 209" wrote in message
...
I hope that I have explained this enough so that someone
who is familiar with jointers can maybe shed some light on this for me
or maybe offer some suggestions.
Tnx , Ken

I don't know how old your machine is
but before you go to the trouble of
trying to fix anything else on it, make
sure the cutterhead runs in ball bearings
and isn't the old babbit type, with brass
shims.

On Mon, 29 Sep 2003 18:10:56 -0500, "My Old Tools"
wrote:

Babbit bearings aren't that much of a problem.

Babbit is OK on a big machine, but it limits the rotational speed. On
a "domestic" size machine, then this means either poor planing quality
(low knife speed) or the temptation to run it at the same sort of rpm
as a modern ball-raced machine.

The only thing I would
really worry about is a square cutter head

Has anyone actually _seen_ one of these ? We've all heard the horror
stories, but when did they disappear ? I've got a WW1 military
handbook that describes tham as obsolete and not ever to be used, and
that's for the military !

--
Smert' spamionam

Andy Dingley wrote:
Has anyone actually _seen_ one of these ?

A'yup. Those who traffic in this sort of thing see them
from time to time. There's even some poor slob on the
OWWM forum who's actively looking for them.

Me? They send shivers up my spine.

UA100

In article , Unisaw A100
wrote:

Andy Dingley wrote:
Has anyone actually _seen_ one of these ?

A'yup. Those who traffic in this sort of thing see them
from time to time. There's even some poor slob on the
OWWM forum who's actively looking for them.

Me? They send shivers up my spine.

Maybe a silly question, but what was wrong with square cutter heads?

--
"Any PC built after 1985 has the storage capacity to house an evil spirit,"
Reverend Jim Peasboro

Big, finger-grabbing gaps between the cutter and the infeed table. If you
think the cylindrical types are quick to nibble and drag, you ought to see
one of these. Friend up town has a 12" he uses for surfacing white cedar
for picnic tables. Scares me every time I see it.

Maybe that's the medic, rather than the woodworker, though.


"Don Mackie" wrote in message
...
In article , Unisaw A100
wrote:

Andy Dingley wrote:
Has anyone actually _seen_ one of these ?

A'yup. Those who traffic in this sort of thing see them
from time to time. There's even some poor slob on the
OWWM forum who's actively looking for them.

Me? They send shivers up my spine.

Maybe a silly question, but what was wrong with square cutter heads?

Andy Dingley wrote:

On Mon, 29 Sep 2003 18:10:56 -0500, "My Old Tools"
wrote:


Babbit bearings aren't that much of a problem.


Babbit is OK on a big machine, but it limits the rotational speed. On
a "domestic" size machine, then this means either poor planing quality
(low knife speed) or the temptation to run it at the same sort of rpm
as a modern ball-raced machine.


The only thing I would
really worry about is a square cutter head


Has anyone actually _seen_ one of these ? We've all heard the horror
stories, but when did they disappear ? I've got a WW1 military
handbook that describes tham as obsolete and not ever to be used, and
that's for the military !

--
Smert' spamionam

Someone donated one to the tall ship project I volounteer for.
http://scmaritime.org/ We're in the process of getting a new webmaster so
it should be updated soon. Might even have a pic of the 24" wide 2 cutter
monster. Bed is about 7' long. Looking at the cutter head, no motor on
it, and turning it by hand wothout blades is kind of scary. I've trimmed a
small chunk out of my thumb witha normal jointer and shudder to think of
the chunk this one could take of in one pass. Not that you'ld be able to
pull back the stub before the other blade comes by for it's share.
Joe

On Tue, 30 Sep 2003 22:33:10 +1200, Don Mackie
pixelated:

Maybe a silly question, but what was wrong with square cutter heads?

Because of the wide gap they leave between cutting blades and
the bed, they're known to be able to gobble off entire hands
and arms in half a second flat, pulling more in as it goes.


================================================== ========
CAUTION: Do NOT look directly into laser with remaining eyeball!
================================================== ========
http://www.diversify.com Comprehensive Website Design

I have a great diagram in an old Oliver catalog showing the geometry and
danger of the square cutter head. Oliver sold round heads to update the old
jointers in this catalog. It was a big deal to come out with a 'safety'
cutter head.

--
Ross
www.myoldtools.com
"Don Mackie" wrote in message
...
In article , Unisaw A100
wrote:

Andy Dingley wrote:
Has anyone actually _seen_ one of these ?

A'yup. Those who traffic in this sort of thing see them
from time to time. There's even some poor slob on the
OWWM forum who's actively looking for them.

Me? They send shivers up my spine.

Maybe a silly question, but what was wrong with square cutter heads?

--
"Any PC built after 1985 has the storage capacity to house an evil
spirit,"
Reverend Jim Peasboro

In article , "George"
wrote:

Big, finger-grabbing gaps between the cutter and the infeed table.

Ah, thanks. I can imagine it now....

--
"Any PC built after 1985 has the storage capacity to house an evil spirit,"
Reverend Jim Peasboro