Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
Woodworking (rec.woodworking) Discussion forum covering all aspects of working with wood. All levels of expertise are encouraged to particiapte. |
Reply |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
Porter Cable 4212 Report
As a treat to myself, I had my wife buy me a 4212
dovetail jig for Christmas. It has a lot of whistles and bells and I had wanted one for a while. The week after Christmas, I finally got a chance to go out and give it a spin. Knowing that dovetail jigs are "very" twitchy to get setup, I cut a armfull of plywood drawer sides and got the jig set up on the bench. My worst fears came to past after a couple of hours of screwing up a "lot" of 1/2" plywood. I was trying to make half blind dovetails and I wanted this jig for a future project that requires drawers. No matter what setting I made, this jig was NOT going to make a "hand fit half blind dovetail". I called a day and resumed the next afternoon. (1) I set up for through dovetails.. That worked. (2) I set up for sliding dovetails.. That worked. (3) I set up for box joints .. That worked. It would NOT make a useable halfblind. I called Porter Cable and tech guy said.. "That's odd". He did mention one little thing "it sounds like the bit is bad" but he discounted that option pretty quickly and suggested I try a couple more things. I was disgusted... but I called my tool store and asked if they had replacement Porter Cable bits for the jig ??? "No"..but we do carry the Freud bit for that jig. I took it.... Freud 22-115 Saturday I put the new bit in the router and setup the jig "exactly" the way the book describes for the test. Made a test cut.... Almost PERFECT on the first pass. It was even a little loose but it was a hand fitted half blind dovetail. I was amazed to say the least. I'll be making a phone call this week to the folks at Porter Cable on their router bit purchases. Just for the record, the 4212 is really a nice jig that is capable of doing very nice work, once you get the correct router bit. |
#2
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
Porter Cable 4212 Report
Pat Barber wrote:
.... Just for the record, the 4212 is really a nice jig that is capable of doing very nice work, once you get the correct router bit. So what's the difference in the bit? -- |
#3
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
Porter Cable 4212 Report
It would appear to be "slightly" under-sized.
dpb wrote: Pat Barber wrote: ... Just for the record, the 4212 is really a nice jig that is capable of doing very nice work, once you get the correct router bit. So what's the difference in the bit? -- |
#4
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
Porter Cable 4212 Report
Pat Barber wrote:
It would appear to be "slightly" under-sized. I fail to see how through would fit any different than half-blind??? -- |
#5
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
Porter Cable 4212 Report
On Feb 4, 2:35 pm, Pat Barber wrote:
Just for the record, the 4212 is really a nice jig that is capable of doing very nice work, once you get the correct router bit. I keep phone log/email log of my attempts with customer support. I think if I were you (and I understand that not everyone will do as I do) I would call Porter Cable, tell them of my solution, and what you had to do to get the jig to work properly. I would tell them that I expected a new bit. You might be surprised at their response. With so many choices for any product these days, it seems that customer support for some things has taken a marked upward turn lately. Besides, I am tired of paying for products that don't perform at all, or under perform. There are a lot of other dovetail jigs out there. BTW, does anyone know why Woodcraft is dropping Akeda? Robert |
#6
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
Porter Cable 4212 Report
I thought I would wait until today(Tuesday), so that
I might have a chance to actually get through to customer support. You can bet that I want a new bit or two. wrote: I keep phone log/email log of my attempts with customer support. I think if I were you (and I understand that not everyone will do as I do) I would call Porter Cable, tell them of my solution, and what you had to do to get the jig to work properly. I would tell them that I expected a new bit. |
#8
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
Porter Cable 4212 Report
Unless the jig is really, really, really, different, DT bits generally
should not matter from one brand to the next. If you have not cut half blind DT'S before with a DT bit keep in mind that the bit has to be adjusted height/depth wise to its "sweet spot". If the joint is too tight you need to raise the bit a tiny bit and retest. If the fit is too loose you need to lower the bit/cut deeper and retest. Once the depth is cutting to your liking this bit setting is the one you want to use for all thicknesses of woods. Half blind DT's have to be cut at the same depth at all times with any particular bit and or jig. You cannot recut the DT's, you need to start with new scraps with each adjustment. "Pat Barber" wrote in message ... As a treat to myself, I had my wife buy me a 4212 dovetail jig for Christmas. It has a lot of whistles and bells and I had wanted one for a while. The week after Christmas, I finally got a chance to go out and give it a spin. Knowing that dovetail jigs are "very" twitchy to get setup, I cut a armfull of plywood drawer sides and got the jig set up on the bench. My worst fears came to past after a couple of hours of screwing up a "lot" of 1/2" plywood. I was trying to make half blind dovetails and I wanted this jig for a future project that requires drawers. No matter what setting I made, this jig was NOT going to make a "hand fit half blind dovetail". I called a day and resumed the next afternoon. (1) I set up for through dovetails.. That worked. (2) I set up for sliding dovetails.. That worked. (3) I set up for box joints .. That worked. It would NOT make a useable halfblind. I called Porter Cable and tech guy said.. "That's odd". He did mention one little thing "it sounds like the bit is bad" but he discounted that option pretty quickly and suggested I try a couple more things. I was disgusted... but I called my tool store and asked if they had replacement Porter Cable bits for the jig ??? "No"..but we do carry the Freud bit for that jig. I took it.... Freud 22-115 Saturday I put the new bit in the router and setup the jig "exactly" the way the book describes for the test. Made a test cut.... Almost PERFECT on the first pass. It was even a little loose but it was a hand fitted half blind dovetail. I was amazed to say the least. I'll be making a phone call this week to the folks at Porter Cable on their router bit purchases. Just for the record, the 4212 is really a nice jig that is capable of doing very nice work, once you get the correct router bit. |
#9
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
Porter Cable 4212 Report
I have cut several dovetails with earlier jigs:
(1) Porter Cable (the one prior to the 42XX series) (2) The older Omnijig Yes, it does require a good bit of "searching" for the sweet spot. The 4212 I bought has(had) a defective router bit that would cut a half blind dovetail that required a hammer to put together. That is NOT correct. By not changing another setting and using the new Freud bit, the jig works as advertised. I consider that defective. This jig is VERY different in that it was designed "around" this screw ball sized bit that is 17/32", which to my knowledge, is not used by anybody else. Leon wrote: Unless the jig is really, really, really, different, DT bits generally should not matter from one brand to the next. If you have not cut half blind DT'S before with a DT bit keep in mind that the bit has to be adjusted height/depth wise to its "sweet spot". If the joint is too tight you need to raise the bit a tiny bit and retest. If the fit is too loose you need to lower the bit/cut deeper and retest. Once the depth is cutting to your liking this bit setting is the one you want to use for all thicknesses of woods. Half blind DT's have to be cut at the same depth at all times with any particular bit and or jig. You cannot recut the DT's, you need to start with new scraps with each adjustment. |
#10
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
Porter Cable 4212 Report
"Pat Barber" wrote in message ... I have cut several dovetails with earlier jigs: (1) Porter Cable (the one prior to the 42XX series) (2) The older Omnijig Yes, it does require a good bit of "searching" for the sweet spot. The 4212 I bought has(had) a defective router bit that would cut a half blind dovetail that required a hammer to put together. That is NOT correct. By not changing another setting and using the new Freud bit, the jig works as advertised. I consider that defective. This jig is VERY different in that it was designed "around" this screw ball sized bit that is 17/32", which to my knowledge, is not used by anybody else. Ok, great, I guess. I just wanted to make sure that you had covered all the basics. |
#11
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
Porter Cable 4212 Report
On Feb 5, 9:12 am, Pat Barber wrote:
This jig is VERY different in that it was designed "around" this screw ball sized bit that is 17/32", which to my knowledge, is not used by anybody else. OK, I didn't know this. Are you saying that this jig is trying to say that it uses a proprietary bit? Is PC attempting to make a jig that uses their special bit (only to screw that up as well) that requires you to buy that particular bit from them? If so, what a shame. I hope you post your experience with PC's customer service and let us know if they take care of you and if a new bit from them allows the jig to work as advertised. It shouldn't be this hard... Robert |
#12
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
Porter Cable 4212 Report
wrote OK, I didn't know this. Are you saying that this jig is trying to say that it uses a proprietary bit? Is PC attempting to make a jig that uses their special bit (only to screw that up as well) that requires you to buy that particular bit from them? It sounds like they are taking lessons from Sears. |
#13
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
Porter Cable 4212 Report
"Lee Michaels" wrote in message . .. wrote OK, I didn't know this. Are you saying that this jig is trying to say that it uses a proprietary bit? Is PC attempting to make a jig that uses their special bit (only to screw that up as well) that requires you to buy that particular bit from them? It sounds like they are taking lessons from Sears. Well, whom ever Sears is using to make their current jigs. Remarkably I still have a Sears DT Jig that I bought in 1980. That jig came with no DT bit and I was able to use any DT bit in it as long it cut a particular maximum width. Angle did not matter. |
#14
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
Porter Cable 4212 Report
Lee Michaels wrote:
wrote OK, I didn't know this. Are you saying that this jig is trying to say that it uses a proprietary bit? Is PC attempting to make a jig that uses their special bit (only to screw that up as well) that requires you to buy that particular bit from them? It sounds like they are taking lessons from Sears. I don't know how the Omnijig works but with the Incra you fine tune the depth to correct for manufacturing tolerances in the bit dimensions. Should be able to do the same with any dovetail jig that cuts pins and tails with the same bit I would think. -- -- --John to email, dial "usenet" and validate (was jclarke at eye bee em dot net) |
#15
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
Porter Cable 4212 Report
I can't really say about the other jigs but
the other two Porter Cable jigs I own, use pretty much garden variety dovetail bits. When I spoke to their cust rep, he told me that the entire jig was design "around" the 17/32" bit. There is some weird math design going on with this jig design. Why choose a bit that was very hard to locate when the jig was initially released ? What is so magic about a 17/32" bit ? I'll never understand the design considerations of a dovetail jig. There are now "several" sources for the 17/32" bit to my knowledge. Freud happens to be a favorite. wrote: OK, I didn't know this. Are you saying that this jig is trying to say that it uses a proprietary bit? Is PC attempting to make a jig that uses their special bit (only to screw that up as well) that requires you to buy that particular bit from them? |
#16
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
Porter Cable 4212 Report
Pat Barber wrote:
The 4212 I bought has(had) a defective router bit that would cut a half blind dovetail that required a hammer to put together. That is NOT correct. By not changing another setting and using the new Freud bit, the jig works as advertised. I consider that defective. So what you're saying is that at the default depth setting the supplied bit didn't work properly? Did you try raising the bit to loosen the joint? This jig is VERY different in that it was designed "around" this screw ball sized bit that is 17/32", which to my knowledge, is not used by anybody else. According to the supplementary manual it will work with other bit sizes as well. They specifically mention 17/32 at 7 and 14 degrees, 9/16 at 7 degrees, and 5/8 at 14 degrees. The only difference is the depth of cut. Chris |
#17
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
Porter Cable 4212 Report
The depth made no difference. The pins and tails
would not fit together properly without using a hammer. Believe me, I tried every depth range the bit was capable of cutting with the same results. I believe the bit was made "undersized" and combined with the template guide set, created a half blind dovetail that would not fit together correctly. The Freud bit proved that. Chris Friesen wrote: So what you're saying is that at the default depth setting the supplied bit didn't work properly? Did you try raising the bit to loosen the joint? According to the supplementary manual it will work with other bit sizes as well. They specifically mention 17/32 at 7 and 14 degrees, 9/16 at 7 degrees, and 5/8 at 14 degrees. The only difference is the depth of cut. |
#18
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
Porter Cable 4212 Report
On Feb 5, 1:39 pm, Pat Barber wrote:
The depth made no difference. The pins and tails would not fit together properly without using a hammer. Believe me, I tried every depth range the bit was capable of cutting with the same results. I believe the bit was made "undersized" and combined with the template guide set, created a half blind dovetail that would not fit together correctly. The Freud bit proved that. Well, I believe it. You said before you are an experienced jig user. So if you can get the Freud to work, you would have been able to get the PC work. I am thinking that this is just another of a long series of missteps in mid-range quality tool making. "The old gray tools just ain't what they used to be, Ain't what they used to be Ain't what they used to be.' Robert |
#19
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
Porter Cable 4212 Report
Pat Barber wrote:
.... This jig is VERY different in that it was designed "around" this screw ball sized bit that is 17/32", which to my knowledge, is not used by anybody else. .... Don't know about the jig per se, but a _very_ quick google found quite a number of 17/32" dovetail bits from all the usual suspects--Whiteside, Freud, MLCS, Grizzly, ..., as well as PC. Hence, one can assume they're not _that_ unusual... -- |
#20
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
Porter Cable 4212 Report
I believe they are all made for the 42xx.
The Freud catalog states that. dpb wrote: Pat Barber wrote: ... This jig is VERY different in that it was designed "around" this screw ball sized bit that is 17/32", which to my knowledge, is not used by anybody else. ... Don't know about the jig per se, but a _very_ quick google found quite a number of 17/32" dovetail bits from all the usual suspects--Whiteside, Freud, MLCS, Grizzly, ..., as well as PC. Hence, one can assume they're not _that_ unusual... -- |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
FS: Porter Cable 557 | Woodworking | |||
Porter Cable 4212 dovetail jig be used on 24" stock | Woodworking | |||
Info on bits for th Porter Cable 4212 dovetail jig | Woodworking | |||
Porter Cable 314 | Woodworking | |||
What's up with Porter-Cable? | Woodworking |