In general which would you use to cut a piece down to proper thickness
assuming the piece is already
1) planed and shaped properly
2) only a smidgen too large

I have a table leg that is about 3/16th too large, so my first inclination
would be to run it over the jointer a couple times to get it down to size.
My reasoning is that the jointer has a superior table and I can control the
feed much better than my benchtop planer. Also my jointer will shave 1/32
reliably whereas my planer is around 3/32.
But would it be a better option to invest in a better planer and use that or
is a jointer perfectly acceptable for shaving down wood?

"Eigenvector" wrote in message


In general which would you use to cut a piece down to proper thickness

I have a table leg that is about 3/16th too large,

For 3/6", what _I_ would use:

Table saw first; planer second; jointer last, and only if I was not overly
concerned with surfaces remaining paralllel to each other.

But would it be a better option to invest in a better planer and use that
or
is a jointer perfectly acceptable for shaving down wood?

A jointer simply cannot guarantee that surfaces will remain parallel, as
will either a well set up table saw, or planer.

YMMV ...

--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 5/14/08
KarlC@ (the obvious)

"Swingman" wrote

"Eigenvector" wrote in message


In general which would you use to cut a piece down to proper thickness

I have a table leg that is about 3/16th too large,

For 3/6", what _I_ would use:

Obviously a typo ... make that "3/16th", NOT 3/6".

--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 5/14/08
KarlC@ (the obvious)

In general which would you use to cut a piece down to proper thickness
assuming the piece is already
1) planed and shaped properly
2) only a smidgen too large

3/16" is a pretty big smidgen.

I have a table leg that is about 3/16th too large, so my first inclination
would be to run it over the jointer a couple times to get it down to size.
My reasoning is that the jointer has a superior table and I can control
the feed much better than my benchtop planer. Also my jointer will shave
1/32 reliably whereas my planer is around 3/32.

Ar you sure? My benchtop planer has a MAXIMUM cut of 1/16 per pass. That is
one full turn of the crank. I generally try to make the last pass a light
one with a quater-turn (1/64th)

But would it be a better option to invest in a better planer and use that
or is a jointer perfectly acceptable for shaving down wood?

You know your tools better that I do, but in my shop, I'd use the planer.

_Steve


** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

"Eigenvector" wrote in message
. ..
In general which would you use to cut a piece down to proper thickness
assuming the piece is already
1) planed and shaped properly
2) only a smidgen too large

I have a table leg that is about 3/16th too large, so my first inclination
would be to run it over the jointer a couple times to get it down to size.
My reasoning is that the jointer has a superior table and I can control
the feed much better than my benchtop planer. Also my jointer will shave
1/32 reliably whereas my planer is around 3/32.
But would it be a better option to invest in a better planer and use that
or is a jointer perfectly acceptable for shaving down wood?


Totally agree with Swingman.

Each tool has it's purpose.

The planer is used to uniformly plane wood to a nominal thickness.

the jointer, straight edges wood . it also flattens on a single face , takes
warp, twist, cupping, etc out of a board, so that it can

be milled to a consistent thickness with a planer. I have never been able to
uniformly dress a board to a consistent thickness

with a jointer alone. I have always had both, jointer and planer.

BUT, ,,,,,,,,in your case the jointer would be your best bet, since we are
shaving a small controlled amount from

an already dimensioned leg . I use a jointer for this a lot when putting a
slight taper in a leg.

KK

http://home.comcast.net/~kdz.96/site/?/home/




"Eigenvector" wrote in message
. ..
In general which would you use to cut a piece down to proper thickness
assuming the piece is already
1) planed and shaped properly
2) only a smidgen too large

I have a table leg that is about 3/16th too large, so my first inclination
would be to run it over the jointer a couple times to get it down to size.
My reasoning is that the jointer has a superior table and I can control
the feed much better than my benchtop planer. Also my jointer will shave
1/32 reliably whereas my planer is around 3/32.
But would it be a better option to invest in a better planer and use that
or is a jointer perfectly acceptable for shaving down wood?

"Swingman" wrote in message
...

"Eigenvector" wrote in message


In general which would you use to cut a piece down to proper thickness

I have a table leg that is about 3/16th too large,

For 3/6", what _I_ would use:

Table saw first; planer second; jointer last, and only if I was not overly
concerned with surfaces remaining paralllel to each other.

But would it be a better option to invest in a better planer and use that
or
is a jointer perfectly acceptable for shaving down wood?

A jointer simply cannot guarantee that surfaces will remain parallel, as
will either a well set up table saw, or planer.

YMMV ...

--

I hear what you're saying. The parallel issue is a genuine concern.

I know a few people commented on how I was misstating the precision of the
planer, but I know the planer I have and it planes wood but has poor depth
control. Its a borrowed tool, so I won't complain, but it just won't do
what I need it to do.

However I hear what everyone is saying, a planer is the appropriate tool
here.

I disagree with the consensus so far.
The jointer should do the job just fine as the leg is already dimensioned
with the faces parallel. 3/16 is a small enough amount that any error
(10% of 3/16?) introduced would never be noticeable by eye in the finished
part.
It sounds like Swingman likes to play with his power tools too much.
Tablesaw, planer, then jointer??
Or did I miss the sarcasm?
Art



"Eigenvector" wrote in message
. ..
In general which would you use to cut a piece down to proper thickness
assuming the piece is already
1) planed and shaped properly
2) only a smidgen too large

I have a table leg that is about 3/16th too large, so my first inclination
would be to run it over the jointer a couple times to get it down to size.
My reasoning is that the jointer has a superior table and I can control the
feed much better than my benchtop planer. Also my jointer will shave 1/32
reliably whereas my planer is around 3/32.
But would it be a better option to invest in a better planer and use that or
is a jointer perfectly acceptable for shaving down wood?

"Artemus" wrote

It sounds like Swingman likes to play with his power tools too much.
Tablesaw, planer, then jointer??
Or did I miss the sarcasm?

Nope ... but here's what you did "miss":

1. My preface: "what _I_ would use:"

2. My qualifier: " ... if you're not overly concerned with surfaces
remaining parallel to each other"

3. And, most importantly, you seem to be missing a proper understanding of
the proper use/capabilities of each tool listed, all "power tools" BTW, a
fact which you seem to have missed as well.

Fact: A jointer is simply NOT a proper tool to dimension stock in
"thickness", which is what the OP asked.

The planer is the proper tool, and the table saw can be, if set up and used
properly, and the dimensioning task falls within it's cutting capability
(which 3/16" appears to do in the case of a table leg).

Now you do know.

--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 5/14/08
KarlC@ (the obvious)

In article , "Swingman" wrote:
"Artemus" wrote

It sounds like Swingman likes to play with his power tools too much.
Tablesaw, planer, then jointer??
Or did I miss the sarcasm?

Nope ... but here's what you did "miss":

I disagree; I think what he missed is that you listed your order of preference
for picking *one* tool to use -- he thought you meant to use _all_three_.

"Doug Miller" wrote

"Swingman" wrote:
"Artemus" wrote

It sounds like Swingman likes to play with his power tools too much.
Tablesaw, planer, then jointer??
Or did I miss the sarcasm?

Nope ... but here's what you did "miss":

I disagree; I think what he missed is that you listed your order of
preference
for picking *one* tool to use -- he thought you meant to use _all_three_.

I certainly didn't see it that way, but on review, you may well be right. If
I indeed "missed" it, I hereby apologize, and thanks for pointing it out!

--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 5/14/08
KarlC@ (the obvious)

On Aug 14, 6:20*pm, (Doug Miller) wrote:
In article , "Swingman" wrote:
"Artemus" wrote

It sounds like Swingman likes to play with his power tools too much.
Tablesaw, planer, then jointer??
Or did I miss the sarcasm?

Nope ... but here's what you did "miss":

I disagree; I think what he missed is that you listed your order of preference
for picking *one* tool to use -- he thought you meant to use _all_three_.

That's my take too.

I regularly use a jointer to thin up a board a little bit. It's just
quicker for me to take a quick pass over it than to have to measure
the thickness of the board, set the planer to the desired thickness
and then run it through. If your jointer and jointing technique are
spot on, the result will still be parallel.

JP
********************
Flawless.

"Jay Pique" wrote

I disagree; I think what he missed is that you listed your order of
preference
for picking *one* tool to use -- he thought you meant to use _all_three_.

That's my take too.

Sorry, looks like I owe Art an apology. Mea culpa, Art.

I regularly use a jointer to thin up a board a little bit.

3/16th is more than a "little bit" ... AMMOF, it's 1/16th over the maximum
recommended cut for many, if not most, jointers.

I know ... multiple passes, but the more passes required over the jointer,
the greater likelihood of ruining the "geometry" of the workpiece, and
shaving off 3/16th on the jointer is pushing the envelope, IME.

IOW, the resultant risk of trapezoidal chair legs won't necessarily make for
centerline 'perpendicular to the floor' joints, which is what chairs leg
designs usually require.

Now, a 1/16th or less on a jointer, I could understand ...

--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 5/14/08
KarlC@ (the obvious)

"Swingman" wrote

centerline 'perpendicular to the floor' joints, which is what chairs leg

Make that "table" legs ... ****, the sun must be over the yardarm somewhere
in the British Empire, and it's obviously past time for a cocktail on the
porch and calling it a day.

--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 5/14/08
KarlC@ (the obvious)

"Artemus" wrote in message
. ..
I disagree with the consensus so far.
The jointer should do the job just fine as the leg is already dimensioned
with the faces parallel. 3/16 is a small enough amount that any error
(10% of 3/16?) introduced would never be noticeable by eye in the finished
part.

Ther is the right way and of course the path some people take because of a
lack of formal training/instruction.



It sounds like Swingman likes to play with his power tools too much.
Tablesaw, planer, then jointer??
Or did I miss the sarcasm?
Art

No, he is simply using the method that was taught when this skil was still
being taught by those that knew.

"Leon" wrote

"Artemus" wrote in message
. ..
I disagree with the consensus so far.
The jointer should do the job just fine as the leg is already
dimensioned
with the faces parallel. 3/16 is a small enough amount that any error
(10% of 3/16?) introduced would never be noticeable by eye in the
finished
part.

Ther is the right way and of course the path some people take because of a
lack of formal training/instruction.



It sounds like Swingman likes to play with his power tools too much.
Tablesaw, planer, then jointer??
Or did I miss the sarcasm?
Art

No, he is simply using the method that was taught when this skil was still
being taught by those that knew.

LOL ... re-reading this thread I'm starting to realize that there are damn
few left around here who have either used/own a jointer, or have ever
actually made a table.

When legs attach to table aprons, it doesn't take much experience to know
that, if not square/parallel, at least consistent geometry at the point of
the joinery is pretty damn important if the legs are going to stand
correctly.

... and they ain't NO way in hell you can guarantee consistent geometry, of
any part, or from part to part, after a SINGLE pass over jointer blades!

--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 5/14/08
KarlC@ (the obvious)

What I was taught for squaring leg stock, after rough cutting, was to
flatten first face, then joint an adjacent second face square and true and
finally plane the other surfaces parallel and square.. If you have a decent
tablesaw that is decently tuned and has a sharp blade, there's no reason
really that you can't substitute the table saw for the planer cuts. In fact
on some woods with difficult grain, I think you sometimes can actually avoid
tearout and get a smoother surface using a table saw over the planer.

"Eigenvector" wrote in message
. ..
In general which would you use to cut a piece down to proper thickness
assuming the piece is already
1) planed and shaped properly
2) only a smidgen too large

I have a table leg that is about 3/16th too large, so my first inclination
would be to run it over the jointer a couple times to get it down to size.
My reasoning is that the jointer has a superior table and I can control
the feed much better than my benchtop planer. Also my jointer will shave
1/32 reliably whereas my planer is around 3/32.
But would it be a better option to invest in a better planer and use that
or is a jointer perfectly acceptable for shaving down wood?

Of course, I'm assuming the legs are thin enough to rip on a table saw;
otherwise, obviously that won't be a solution for you.. Good luck..

"Jim Hall" wrote in message
. ..
What I was taught for squaring leg stock, after rough cutting, was to
flatten first face, then joint an adjacent second face square and true and
finally plane the other surfaces parallel and square.. If you have a
decent tablesaw that is decently tuned and has a sharp blade, there's no
reason really that you can't substitute the table saw for the planer cuts.
In fact on some woods with difficult grain, I think you sometimes can
actually avoid tearout and get a smoother surface using a table saw over
the planer.

"Eigenvector" wrote in message
. ..
In general which would you use to cut a piece down to proper thickness
assuming the piece is already
1) planed and shaped properly
2) only a smidgen too large

I have a table leg that is about 3/16th too large, so my first
inclination would be to run it over the jointer a couple times to get it
down to size. My reasoning is that the jointer has a superior table and I
can control the feed much better than my benchtop planer. Also my
jointer will shave 1/32 reliably whereas my planer is around 3/32.
But would it be a better option to invest in a better planer and use that
or is a jointer perfectly acceptable for shaving down wood?

Gosh, after re-reading my message, I may have not been clear. You flatten
the first face on the jointer..

"Jim Hall" wrote in message
. ..
What I was taught for squaring leg stock, after rough cutting, was to
flatten first face, then joint an adjacent second face square and true and
finally plane the other surfaces parallel and square.. If you have a
decent tablesaw that is decently tuned and has a sharp blade, there's no
reason really that you can't substitute the table saw for the planer cuts.
In fact on some woods with difficult grain, I think you sometimes can
actually avoid tearout and get a smoother surface using a table saw over
the planer.

"Eigenvector" wrote in message
. ..
In general which would you use to cut a piece down to proper thickness
assuming the piece is already
1) planed and shaped properly
2) only a smidgen too large

I have a table leg that is about 3/16th too large, so my first
inclination would be to run it over the jointer a couple times to get it
down to size. My reasoning is that the jointer has a superior table and I
can control the feed much better than my benchtop planer. Also my
jointer will shave 1/32 reliably whereas my planer is around 3/32.
But would it be a better option to invest in a better planer and use that
or is a jointer perfectly acceptable for shaving down wood?

"Swingman" wrote:




... and they ain't NO way in hell you can guarantee consistent geometry, of
any part, or from part to part, after a SINGLE pass over jointer blades!

No fence on your jointer? g

Seriously, I agree that the thickness planer is the right tool for the
job. I would remove bulk with a saw if it were any more than 3/16ths
being removed.

But the reaction against the jointer (which is NOT the best tool for
the job) may be overstated. If I didn't have a planer, I would scribe
the desired thickness, run it twice over the jointer with the table
set to get a cut of a little less than 3/32. Then observe how close to
the scribe line I was getting at all points, set the jointer for
superfine cut, and sneak up on the scribe line. If one part of the cut
neared the scribe line before another, I'd know that my technique or
jointer was off, and would switch to a hand plane for the last few
thou.

Or cut it the right size to begin with, but where's the fun in that?
g
--
Alex -- Replace "nospam" with "mail" to reply by email. Checked infrequently.

"Swingman" wrote in message
...


LOL ... re-reading this thread I'm starting to realize that there are damn
few left around here who have either used/own a jointer, or have ever
actually made a table.

When legs attach to table aprons, it doesn't take much experience to know
that, if not square/parallel, at least consistent geometry at the point of
the joinery is pretty damn important if the legs are going to stand
correctly.

... and they ain't NO way in hell you can guarantee consistent geometry,
of
any part, or from part to part, after a SINGLE pass over jointer blades!



I recall in shop class Mr. Hardy would put you in line for a couple of licks
if he caught any one using the jointer for any purpose other than to
straighten an edge or flatten a surface. You were going to do it correctly
or not at all. It seems like yesterday, 1968, when he looked every in the
eye after making that threat. I remember something about not building on
top of mistakes and working from a good foundation, that part was over my
head at the time but the threat of the licks make the instructions much more
clear.

"Leon" writes:

"Swingman" wrote in message
m...


LOL ... re-reading this thread I'm starting to realize that there are damn
few left around here who have either used/own a jointer, or have ever
actually made a table.

When legs attach to table aprons, it doesn't take much experience to know
that, if not square/parallel, at least consistent geometry at the point of
the joinery is pretty damn important if the legs are going to stand
correctly.

... and they ain't NO way in hell you can guarantee consistent geometry,
of
any part, or from part to part, after a SINGLE pass over jointer blades!



I recall in shop class Mr. Hardy would put you in line for a couple of licks
if he caught any one using the jointer for any purpose other than to
straighten an edge or flatten a surface. You were going to do it correctly
or not at all. It seems like yesterday, 1968, when he looked every in the
eye after making that threat. I remember something about not building on
top of mistakes and working from a good foundation, that part was over my
head at the time but the threat of the licks make the instructions much more
clear.


How about tapering legs? A common use for the jointer.

scott

"Scott Lurndal" wrote

How about tapering legs? A common use for the jointer.

A good question, but not the same issue. The OP's was a question on the
"thickness" of the piece, not on the tapering of a leg.

Tapering a leg is usually done below the area where the apron joins the leg,
thus the area of the joinery is unaffected by using the jointer to do the
taper, not to mention that a taper usually doesn't require the same
precision that joinery does.

--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 5/14/08
KarlC@ (the obvious)

"Jim Hall" wrote

Gosh, after re-reading my message, I may have not been clear. You flatten
the first face on the jointer..

Not too worry ... only the small minded would quibble over a slip of the
tongue when it's that obvious that you knew what you were about. Yours was
probably the most informative post in the thread thus far.

--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 5/14/08
KarlC@ (the obvious)

"Scott Lurndal" wrote in message
...


How about tapering legs? A common use for the jointer.


Table Saw

In article ,
says...

"Scott Lurndal" wrote in message
...


How about tapering legs? A common use for the jointer.


Table Saw


With a homemade tapering jig, yes sir.

S.

samson wrote:
In article ,
says...
"Scott Lurndal" wrote in message
...
How about tapering legs? A common use for the jointer.

Table Saw


With a homemade tapering jig, yes sir.

S.

Same here, as long as it's a sled-style jig. Mine isn't on the web
right now, but here is a similar version:
http://cdn2.libsyn.com/mattswoodshop/Table_Saw_Taper_Sled_1.pdf?nvb=20080816111744&nva= 20080817111744&t=0cb6c978ef8452973e109

Some taper jigs (and many other jigs! don't get me going...) are
SOOOOOO over complicated, so I totally understand why many skip this method.

A clamping sled jig is very comfortable to use, simple and fast to make,
easily adjustable, totally repeatable, and suitable for any angle or
number of faces. Another great reason to keep runner stock at the ready.

Hinge-style jigs are evil!

"B A R R Y" wrote in message
...
Same here, as long as it's a sled-style jig. Mine isn't on the web right
now, but here is a similar version:
http://cdn2.libsyn.com/mattswoodshop/Table_Saw_Taper_Sled_1.pdf?nvb=20080816111744&nva= 20080817111744&t=0cb6c978ef8452973e109

Some taper jigs (and many other jigs! don't get me going...) are SOOOOOO
over complicated, so I totally understand why many skip this method.

A clamping sled jig is very comfortable to use, simple and fast to make,
easily adjustable, totally repeatable, and suitable for any angle or
number of faces. Another great reason to keep runner stock at the ready.

Hinge-style jigs are evil!

My latest taper jig is also the sled that I use to straighten 8' boards on
the TS.

On Aug 15, 8:46*pm, "Swingman" wrote:
"Jim Hall" wrote

Gosh, after re-reading my message, I may have not been clear. *You flatten
the first face on the jointer..

Not too worry ... only the small minded would quibble over a slip of the
tongue when it's that obvious that you knew what you were about. Yours was
probably the most informative post in the thread thus far.

I'm totally offended.

JP

This thread had me baffled for a few minutes

English reader, therefore assumed that planer referred to a jointer, and
jointer referred to a.. er, ummmŠ jointer also
Forgot that you chaps say planer when you mean "thicknesser", and you call a
planer a "jointer." :-)

Not a big deal in _this_ case, I know, but potentially dangerous.. "just feed
wood into the planer with your hand pressing down on top of the stock.."
kinda thing. Not a great example, but you get the idea,

You say potato and I say tomatoe.. let's call the whole thing off.

A friend in Americaland was completely baffled by my campaign to stop parents
parking - and driving - outside the local school on the "pavement." It took a
few minutes for her to understand why I was so upset by this apparently
correct behaviour. There are plenty of cases where we think we're talking
about the same thing, make judgments and act accordingly. Wars have happened
for less.

Anyhow up, any European readers - Check your definitions before assuming that
what you think you understand is what was meant. "Rabbits" vs. "your money
back," for example.

On Thu, 14 Aug 2008 20:39:35 +0100, Ken wrote
(in article ):

Each tool has it's purpose.

The planer is used to uniformly plane wood to a nominal thickness.

the jointer, straight edges wood . it also flattens on a single face , takes
warp, twist, cupping, etc out of a board, so that it can

be milled to a consistent thickness with a planer. I have never been able to
uniformly dress a board to a consistent thickness

with a jointer alone. I have always had both, jointer and planer.

BUT, ,,,,,,,,in your case the jointer would be your best bet, since we are
shaving a small controlled amount from

an already dimensioned leg . I use a jointer for this a lot when putting a
slight taper in a leg.

KK

http://home.comcast.net/~kdz.96/site/?/home/

On Sat, 16 Aug 2008 02:07:18 +0100, Leon wrote
(in article ):


"Scott Lurndal" wrote in message
...


How about tapering legs? A common use for the jointer.


Table Saw



Axe

Bored Borg wrote:
This thread had me baffled for a few minutes

English reader, therefore assumed that planer referred to a jointer,
and jointer referred to a.. er, ummmŠ jointer also
Forgot that you chaps say planer when you mean "thicknesser", and
you
call a planer a "jointer." :-)

Not a big deal in _this_ case, I know, but potentially dangerous..
"just feed wood into the planer with your hand pressing down on top
of the stock.." kinda thing. Not a great example, but you get the
idea,

You say potato and I say tomatoe.. let's call the whole thing off.

A friend in Americaland was completely baffled by my campaign to
stop
parents parking - and driving - outside the local school on the
"pavement." It took a few minutes for her to understand why I was so
upset by this apparently correct behaviour. There are plenty of
cases where we think we're talking about the same thing, make
judgments and act accordingly. Wars have happened for less.

Anyhow up, any European readers - Check your definitions before
assuming that what you think you understand is what was meant.
"Rabbits" vs. "your money back," for example.

On Thu, 14 Aug 2008 20:39:35 +0100, Ken wrote
(in article ):

Each tool has it's purpose.

The planer is used to uniformly plane wood to a nominal thickness.

the jointer, straight edges wood . it also flattens on a single
face
, takes warp, twist, cupping, etc out of a board, so that it can

be milled to a consistent thickness with a planer. I have never
been
able to uniformly dress a board to a consistent thickness

with a jointer alone. I have always had both, jointer and planer.

BUT, ,,,,,,,,in your case the jointer would be your best bet, since
we are shaving a small controlled amount from

an already dimensioned leg . I use a jointer for this a lot when
putting a slight taper in a leg.

KK

http://home.comcast.net/~kdz.96/site/?/home/

OK, I have to ask. Are you a bored Trekistani cyborg, or are you a
bored Big Orange Retail Giant, or did your parents name you "Borg", or
is "borg" a Britishism that I have not heard before?

--
--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

in 75214 20080817 145216 "J. Clarke" wrote:

OK, I have to ask. Are you a bored Trekistani cyborg, or are you a
bored Big Orange Retail Giant, or did your parents name you "Borg", or
is "borg" a Britishism that I have not heard before?

You're not a tennis fan then?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bjorn_Borg

On Mon, 18 Aug 2008 08:50:11 +0100, Bob Martin wrote
(in article ) :

in 75214 20080817 145216 "J. Clarke" wrote:

OK, I have to ask. Are you a bored Trekistani cyborg, or are you a
bored Big Orange Retail Giant, or did your parents name you "Borg", or
is "borg" a Britishism that I have not heard before?

You're not a tennis fan then?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bjorn_Borg

Yes, it's none of these. Or all of them except one. Or not.

I hope that clears things up.

actually, it's driven entirely by the e-mail address which was easy to
remember but caused jawdrops of disbelief when given out. Don't try it - I've
discontinued it 'cos of the huge amount of spam I got

Actually, there is absolutely nothing wrong with using a jointer for
this purpose... as long as it is a Stanley #7 or 8 or a similar model
from another manufacturer.



--
Better to be stuck up in a tree than tied to one.

Larry Wasserman - Baltimore Maryland - lwasserm(a)sdf. lonestar.org

"Larry W" wrote in message
Actually, there is absolutely nothing wrong with using a jointer for
this purpose... as long as it is a Stanley #7 or 8 or a similar model
from another manufacturer.

Agreed ... but it's too bad that's not what the OP wanted to know.

--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 5/14/08
KarlC@ (the obvious)

Wow. Go away for a while and I missed all the fun.
Comments embedded.
Art

"Swingman" wrote in message
...
"Artemus" wrote

It sounds like Swingman likes to play with his power tools too much.
Tablesaw, planer, then jointer??
Or did I miss the sarcasm?

Nope ... but here's what you did "miss":

1. My preface: "what _I_ would use:"
I didn't miss it. I understood you to say you'd use all 3 PT's in succession.

2. My qualifier: " ... if you're not overly concerned with surfaces
remaining parallel to each other"
Didn't miss this either and you're right, I'm not overly concerned with this in the
case of a table leg.

3. And, most importantly, you seem to be missing a proper understanding of
the proper use/capabilities of each tool listed, all "power tools" BTW, a
fact which you seem to have missed as well.
You seen to be missing the fact that most tools have many uses and capabilities.
Admittedly each may be best for a particular use but it is not the sole tool that
will do the job.


Fact: A jointer is simply NOT a proper tool to dimension stock in
"thickness", which is what the OP asked.
No. The OP stated that the leg was already "1) planed and shaped properly".
The jointer can do the job just fine and, if properly set up, won't leave sniped
ends like his benchtop planer will. Furthermore, only the inside edges of a table
leg need to be square - one could trim the outside edges with an axe and it isn't
going to make any difference in the leg being square to the aprons or floor.
I stand by my original post - a jointer will do his job and any error isn't going to
be noticed by eye.


The planer is the proper tool, and the table saw can be, if set up and used
properly, and the dimensioning task falls within it's cutting capability
(which 3/16" appears to do in the case of a table leg).
Did you change your mind re the jointer or did you just leave it it out now to be
argumentative?


Now you do know.
I know you appear to be narrow minded, defensive, and arrogant.


--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 5/14/08
KarlC@ (the obvious)

Looks like I owe you one too.
I should have read the whole thread before firing off a response.
Art

"Swingman" wrote ...
"Jay Pique" wrote

I disagree; I think what he missed is that you listed your order of
preference
for picking *one* tool to use -- he thought you meant to use _all_three_.

That's my take too.

Sorry, looks like I owe Art an apology. Mea culpa, Art.

"Artemus" wrote
Looks like I owe you one too.
I should have read the whole thread before firing off a response.
Art

"Swingman" wrote ...
"Jay Pique" wrote

I disagree; I think what he missed is that you listed your order of
preference
for picking *one* tool to use -- he thought you meant to use
_all_three_.

That's my take too.

Sorry, looks like I owe Art an apology. Mea culpa, Art.


And a rare Wreck moment...

Dueling Apologies!!

I never thought I would see the day...

(OK Swingman, give'm hell!) :-)