I'm trying to line up my new saw as best I can without buying any fancy
dongles to take ultra precise measurements.

Today's project was getting the blade lined up parallel to the miter slots.
I sharpened a pencil to a tiny point, marked a tooth, then clamped the
pencil to my miter gauge. Moving pencil and tooth to the back of the
table, there was a significant gap.

After dicking around with the six bolts and wiggling around on the saw guts
for a couple of hours, the best I was able to accomplish is that there is
still a 0.014" gap between the pencil point and the marked tooth at the
back of the table. I could never manage to get it closer than that and
keep it there while the bolts were tightened back up.

Unfortunately, the gap indicates that the blade is closer to the rip fence
at the back than at the front, which is really seriously not cool. Still,
I don't see what else I can do about it. This was the product of much
fiddling, and it was hard to get it even this close. (BTW, the rip fence
is to the right of the blade. I was using the left miter slot.)

I don't have much lumber on hand to do test cuts with, but I tried a piece
of 4/4 red oak about 3' long. I ripped a strip 1" wide and measured it at
various points with dial calipers. It's damn close. The difference in
measurement from point to point is less than I can measure without a
micrometer, though there *is* some minute variation. Theer were no burn
marks at all, no binding, no feeling of impending kickback, and it was a
very smooth cut.

So what does the Wreck say? Keep dicking with it or leave it alone until I
see burn marks and other indications of a serious alignment problem? Maybe
try some 6/4 or larger and see how that changes things...

--
Michael McIntyre ---- Silvan
Linux fanatic, and certified Geek; registered Linux user #243621
http://www.geocities.com/Paris/Rue/5407/

Silvan,

I have to ask how you aligned your miter gauge before clamping your
reference pencil to it. That may be the error you're seeing now.

Bob S.


"Silvan" wrote in message
...
I'm trying to line up my new saw as best I can without buying any fancy
dongles to take ultra precise measurements.

Today's project was getting the blade lined up parallel to the miter
slots.
I sharpened a pencil to a tiny point, marked a tooth, then clamped the
pencil to my miter gauge. Moving pencil and tooth to the back of the
table, there was a significant gap.

After dicking around with the six bolts and wiggling around on the saw
guts
for a couple of hours, the best I was able to accomplish is that there is
still a 0.014" gap between the pencil point and the marked tooth at the
back of the table. I could never manage to get it closer than that and
keep it there while the bolts were tightened back up.

Unfortunately, the gap indicates that the blade is closer to the rip fence
at the back than at the front, which is really seriously not cool. Still,
I don't see what else I can do about it. This was the product of much
fiddling, and it was hard to get it even this close. (BTW, the rip fence
is to the right of the blade. I was using the left miter slot.)

I don't have much lumber on hand to do test cuts with, but I tried a piece
of 4/4 red oak about 3' long. I ripped a strip 1" wide and measured it at
various points with dial calipers. It's damn close. The difference in
measurement from point to point is less than I can measure without a
micrometer, though there *is* some minute variation. Theer were no burn
marks at all, no binding, no feeling of impending kickback, and it was a
very smooth cut.

So what does the Wreck say? Keep dicking with it or leave it alone until
I
see burn marks and other indications of a serious alignment problem?
Maybe
try some 6/4 or larger and see how that changes things...

--
Michael McIntyre ---- Silvan
Linux fanatic, and certified Geek; registered Linux user #243621
http://www.geocities.com/Paris/Rue/5407/

Seems to me it wouldn't matter how the miter gauge was aligned. Even if you
had the guage at, say 29 degrees, the difference between the pencil point
and the blade at the front or back of the blade would be the same.

Silvan, did you try tapping hardwood wedges between the trunions as you
tightened the bolts back down? Maybe you could get it moved over enough so
that, even though you might still have an .014 gap or so, at least the blade
would be further from the fence at the back of the blade. I'm not saying
that it should be, just that it would be better that way it seems. Ideally
(and of course by reading your post I can tell you already know this), the
blade should be (nearly) perfectly aligned with the miter guage slots, and
any desired variance between the blade and fence should be adjusted at the
fence.

Larry

"Silvan" wrote in message
...
I'm trying to line up my new saw as best I can without buying any fancy
dongles to take ultra precise measurements.

Today's project was getting the blade lined up parallel to the miter
slots.
I sharpened a pencil to a tiny point, marked a tooth, then clamped the
pencil to my miter gauge. Moving pencil and tooth to the back of the
table, there was a significant gap.

After dicking around with the six bolts and wiggling around on the saw
guts
for a couple of hours, the best I was able to accomplish is that there is
still a 0.014" gap between the pencil point and the marked tooth at the
back of the table. I could never manage to get it closer than that and
keep it there while the bolts were tightened back up.

Unfortunately, the gap indicates that the blade is closer to the rip fence
at the back than at the front, which is really seriously not cool. Still,
I don't see what else I can do about it. This was the product of much
fiddling, and it was hard to get it even this close. (BTW, the rip fence
is to the right of the blade. I was using the left miter slot.)

I don't have much lumber on hand to do test cuts with, but I tried a piece
of 4/4 red oak about 3' long. I ripped a strip 1" wide and measured it at
various points with dial calipers. It's damn close. The difference in
measurement from point to point is less than I can measure without a
micrometer, though there *is* some minute variation. Theer were no burn
marks at all, no binding, no feeling of impending kickback, and it was a
very smooth cut.

So what does the Wreck say? Keep dicking with it or leave it alone until
I
see burn marks and other indications of a serious alignment problem?
Maybe
try some 6/4 or larger and see how that changes things...

--
Michael McIntyre ---- Silvan
Linux fanatic, and certified Geek; registered Linux user #243621
http://www.geocities.com/Paris/Rue/5407/

To get the clean cuts with no tooth marks and a smooth surface, pretty anal
is helpful.. Usually in the .000 to .003 range for the blade being parallel
to the miter slots from the front of the blade to the back of the blade as
you measured.
Have you tried your cuts yet? Maybe your cuts are good enough for you. If
you are not happy, keep at it.

Silvan wrote:
Group: rec.woodworking Date: Sun, Feb 29, 2004, 8:04pm From:
(Silvan)
I'm trying to line up my new saw as best I can without buying any fancy
dongles to take ultra precise measurements.
snip
************************************************** ****
There are inexpensive dial indicators which you can clamp to your miter
gauge, if you are really serious about obtaining the best alignment
possible.

Peace ~ Sir Edgar
=F8=F8=F8=F8=F8=F8=F8=F8=F8=F8=F8=F8=F8=F8=F8=F8=F 8=F8=F8=F8=F8=F8=F8=F8=F8=
=F8=F8=F8=F8=F8=F8=F8=F8=F8=F8=F8=F8=F8

(Silvan)
I'm trying to line up my new saw as best I can without buying any fancy
dongles to take ultra precise measurements.

Keep trying. You don't need fancy dongles to take ultra precise measurements,
just a set of feeler gauges and a combination square. Tom, still gleaning.
Someday, it'll all be over....

A .014" gap is significant. I'd fuss over it to get it closer. Your
saw will give you better performance. Adjusting a table saw is a lot
easier than a band saw tune up!

On Sun, 29 Feb 2004 20:04:13 -0500, Silvan
wrote:

\
I don't have much lumber on hand to do test cuts with, but I tried a piece
of 4/4 red oak about 3' long. I ripped a strip 1" wide and measured it at
various points with dial calipers. It's damn close. The difference in
measurement from point to point is less than I can measure without a
micrometer, though there *is* some minute variation. Theer were no burn
marks at all, no binding, no feeling of impending kickback, and it was a
very smooth cut.
Then Barry wrote:
I think you're close, but what do you mean by "minute variation"?

It's pronounced MY-NOOT, and it means small or miniscule. Sylvan, the
variation you tried to measure on the 3 foot test rip won't tell you much. But
try a crosscut on a ten inch wide piece with a sled, and you'll see the effects
of your saw's maladjustment. Careful! Tom
Someday, it'll all be over....

Larry,

If he used a used a try square to align the miter head to the blade, the
head would be at one position (angle to the blade) and when it's holding a
pencil, it's used at the front of the blade and then at the rear. The
difference will be more/less as the gauge is moved along the blade. With
the miter aligned to the blade while it's out of adjustment and then using
it to try and align the slot to the blade is not going to work.

He could turn the miter gauge upside down in the slot and align the head
with the front edge of the table. Then reverse it and put it in the slot
upside down again at the rear edge and see if there's a difference. If so,
then the slot is not perpendicular to the edges referenced.

So saying it doesn't make a difference is not exactly correct - right?

Bob S.


"Lawrence R Horgan" wrote in message
...
Seems to me it wouldn't matter how the miter gauge was aligned. Even if
you
had the guage at, say 29 degrees, the difference between the pencil point
and the blade at the front or back of the blade would be the same.

Irrespective of the angle of the miter head the distance of anything fixed
to it should be the same when the head is moved between the front and rear
of the blade. As was originally stated a marked tooth is being used as the
reference, there bye eliminating any eccentricity of the mounting boss.
When the blade is truly parallel to the miter slot it may not be at 90 deg.
to the front of the table but the fence has adjustment to compensate for
this.

Though a dial indicator is the recommended tool feeler gauges work just as
well.

Bernard R

"Bob S." wrote in message
.. .
Larry,

If he used a used a try square to align the miter head to the blade, the
head would be at one position (angle to the blade) and when it's holding a
pencil, it's used at the front of the blade and then at the rear. The
difference will be more/less as the gauge is moved along the blade. With
the miter aligned to the blade while it's out of adjustment and then using
it to try and align the slot to the blade is not going to work.

He could turn the miter gauge upside down in the slot and align the head
with the front edge of the table. Then reverse it and put it in the slot
upside down again at the rear edge and see if there's a difference. If
so,
then the slot is not perpendicular to the edges referenced.

So saying it doesn't make a difference is not exactly correct - right?

Bob S.


"Lawrence R Horgan" wrote in message
...
Seems to me it wouldn't matter how the miter gauge was aligned. Even if
you
had the guage at, say 29 degrees, the difference between the pencil
point
and the blade at the front or back of the blade would be the same.

On Sun, 29 Feb 2004 20:04:13 -0500, Silvan
scribbled:
snip
After dicking around with the six bolts and wiggling around on the saw guts
for a couple of hours, the best I was able to accomplish is that there is
still a 0.014" gap between the pencil point and the marked tooth at the
back of the table. I could never manage to get it closer than that and
keep it there while the bolts were tightened back up.
snip
So what does the Wreck say? Keep dicking with it or leave it alone until I
see burn marks and other indications of a serious alignment problem? Maybe
try some 6/4 or larger and see how that changes things...

One thought - is the mitre gauge (miter gage, Keith) slot milled
straight or is there some bow in it? Might be worth checking first.
0.014" sounds like a lot over the width of the blade. It's almost
1/64". I'm surprised you're not getting any burning.

Luigi
Replace "nonet" with "yukonomics" for real email address
www.yukonomics.ca/wooddorking/antifaq.html
www.yukonomics.ca/wooddorking/humour.html

You said:

After dicking around with the six bolts and wiggling around on the saw
guts
for a couple of hours, the best I was able to accomplish is that there is
still a 0.014" gap between the pencil point and the marked tooth at the
back of the table. I could never manage to get it closer than that and
keep it there while the bolts were tightened back up.

Unfortunately, the gap indicates that the blade is closer to the rip fence
at the back than at the front, which is really seriously not cool. Still,
I don't see what else I can do about it. This was the product of much
fiddling, and it was hard to get it even this close. (BTW, the rip fence
is to the right of the blade. I was using the left miter slot.)

From your post, I infer that you are trying to align a contractor saw.
If I guessed right, go to Woodcraft.com and purchase a PALS alignment
system for your saw (under $30 including shipping). You will now be
able to adjust your contractors saw to the tolerances you need.

I have no ties to the manufacturer or Woodcraft but I am a satisfied
customer who dialed in his Craftsman table saw using the system in
under an hour.

Hi Mike

Signs of serious misalignment problems really isn't the issue. The issue is
what you can live with in the way of error when putting a project together.

To be honest I really don't know how much of a throw down a .014" gap is
going to give you but I suspect, not a lot.

The only real way you are going to be able to tell is when it comes time to
assemble something.

If you were lining up the miter slot to the blade, ripping stock against the
fence isn't going to give you any kind of an indication of how well the saw
is lined up since it's perfectly possible, with fences I'm familiar with, to
adjust them so they are parallel to the blade regardless of what the miter
slot is doing. The test is to set your miter gauge at 90 degrees to the
blade and cross cut something.

Take the two pieces, flip one over, put the two cut ends together. How close
they mate with the boards forming a straight edge is the measure of how good
the line up is.

Good luck


--
Mike G.

Heirloom Woods
www.heirloom-woods.net
"Silvan" wrote in message
...
I'm trying to line up my new saw as best I can without buying any fancy
dongles to take ultra precise measurements.

Today's project was getting the blade lined up parallel to the miter
slots.
I sharpened a pencil to a tiny point, marked a tooth, then clamped the
pencil to my miter gauge. Moving pencil and tooth to the back of the
table, there was a significant gap.

After dicking around with the six bolts and wiggling around on the saw
guts
for a couple of hours, the best I was able to accomplish is that there is
still a 0.014" gap between the pencil point and the marked tooth at the
back of the table. I could never manage to get it closer than that and
keep it there while the bolts were tightened back up.

Unfortunately, the gap indicates that the blade is closer to the rip fence
at the back than at the front, which is really seriously not cool. Still,
I don't see what else I can do about it. This was the product of much
fiddling, and it was hard to get it even this close. (BTW, the rip fence
is to the right of the blade. I was using the left miter slot.)

I don't have much lumber on hand to do test cuts with, but I tried a piece
of 4/4 red oak about 3' long. I ripped a strip 1" wide and measured it at
various points with dial calipers. It's damn close. The difference in
measurement from point to point is less than I can measure without a
micrometer, though there *is* some minute variation. Theer were no burn
marks at all, no binding, no feeling of impending kickback, and it was a
very smooth cut.

So what does the Wreck say? Keep dicking with it or leave it alone until
I
see burn marks and other indications of a serious alignment problem?
Maybe
try some 6/4 or larger and see how that changes things...

--
Michael McIntyre ---- Silvan
Linux fanatic, and certified Geek; registered Linux user #243621
http://www.geocities.com/Paris/Rue/5407/

Bernard,

Think about it... The table top (miter slots) are not parallel to the
blade - hence the distance from a point on the front of the blade and a
reference point on the miter gauge head will be more/less as the miter gauge
is moved to the rear of the blade. Do you need a drawing to visualize it ?
ASCII art below is exaggerated but shows what I mean. As the Ref point
moves towards the rear of the blade the distance from Ref point to the blade
is less. Now if the miter gauge head is not perpendicular to the slot, that
introduces even more error as well and if the slot is not perpendicular to
the table edge - more error is introduced.



| | \ \
| | \ \
| | \ \
| | \ \
|------------| \ \
Ref \ \

Miter Slot - Head Blade


Bob S.


"Bernard Randall" wrote in message
...
Irrespective of the angle of the miter head the distance of anything fixed
to it should be the same when the head is moved between the front and rear
of the blade. As was originally stated a marked tooth is being used as
the
reference, there bye eliminating any eccentricity of the mounting boss.
When the blade is truly parallel to the miter slot it may not be at 90
deg.
to the front of the table but the fence has adjustment to compensate for
this.

Though a dial indicator is the recommended tool feeler gauges work just as
well.

Bernard R

"Bob S." wrote in message
.. .
Larry,

If he used a used a try square to align the miter head to the blade, the
head would be at one position (angle to the blade) and when it's holding
a
pencil, it's used at the front of the blade and then at the rear. The
difference will be more/less as the gauge is moved along the blade.
With
the miter aligned to the blade while it's out of adjustment and then
using
it to try and align the slot to the blade is not going to work.

He could turn the miter gauge upside down in the slot and align the head
with the front edge of the table. Then reverse it and put it in the
slot
upside down again at the rear edge and see if there's a difference. If
so,
then the slot is not perpendicular to the edges referenced.

So saying it doesn't make a difference is not exactly correct - right?

Bob S.


"Lawrence R Horgan" wrote in message
...
Seems to me it wouldn't matter how the miter gauge was aligned. Even
if
you
had the guage at, say 29 degrees, the difference between the pencil
point
and the blade at the front or back of the blade would be the same.

Silvan wrote in message ...
I'm trying to line up my new saw as best I can without buying any fancy
dongles to take ultra precise measurements.

Snip

Until I got my $25 magnetic dial indicator, here's what I did:

My miter gauge had some slots on the vertical surface (the "back") of
it. I screwed a piece of 2x4 onto the miter gauge so that the end of
the 2x was about a half inch from the blade. I screwed a screw into
the end grain (on the blade side) of the 2x until there was about a
half inch sticking out. Pick a saw blade tooth and bring it to the
height of the screw. Screw or unscrew until the screw head is just
touching the blade. Mark tooth with tape, crayon, blood, etc. Slide
2x to the back of the blade and rotate mark to where the screw hits
the marked tooth in the back of the blade. Adjust as necessary. Pick
another saw tooth and repeat.

I've never adjusted a saw such as yours (nice neener, BTW), but I
would think that the process of adjusting your saw table would be
pretty much the same as mine. There's a few bolts holding the table
to the base, right? Loosen some (or almost all) of them and twist the
whole table surface until the miter slots are parallel with the blade.
Then, carefully tighten bolts down. It took me about an hour to do
mine.

Incidentally, my 2x4 screw method (that I think I got from Charlie
Self--thanks, Charlie) proved to have less than .001" deviation as
measured with my cheap-ass dial indicator. Knowing that, I still use
the ol' 2x4 screw method for periodic checks of my miter slots. It's
easier than the dial indicator.

I would say that .014" is kinda a lot, though. If you're not getting
any burning, it may be that the rip fence is parallel to the blade,
but not to the saw table. Or maybe that the carbide hangs over the
edge of the blade by that much.

My brother-in-law called my saw Old Smoky for a while there.

Hope it helps, Sylvan.

-Phil Crow

Bernard,

Think about it... The table top (miter slots) are not parallel to the
blade - hence the distance from a point on the front of the blade and a
reference point on the miter gauge head will be more/less as the miter
gauge
is moved to the rear of the blade. Do you need a drawing to visualize it
?
ASCII art below is exaggerated but shows what I mean. As the Ref point
moves towards the rear of the blade the distance from Ref point to the
blade
is less. Now if the miter gauge head is not perpendicular to the slot,
that
introduces even more error as well and if the slot is not perpendicular to
the table edge - more error is introduced.


Yes...HOWEVER, this has nothing to do with the angle of the miter
GAUGE...not the miter SLOT.

The angle of the miter gauge doesn't matter for checking the blade to the
slots for the same reason that you can actually cut a miter with said gauge
after the table is aligned to the slot.

Mike

I also had trouble holding the alignment while tightening the trunion
bolts. Until the wreck suggested to rig up something similar to a PALS
system, after that, no problem-o.
-george

"Yes......However".....WTF ?

Wow...what a tough friggin crowd we have here tonight. Just trying to help
the OP and two guy's jump in looking for a fight nitpicking without looking
at was said.

Good enough guy's - obviously I'm wrong and you two geniuses can give him
the straight answer so he can solve the problem.

Bob S.

In article ,
says...
From your post, I infer that you are trying to align a contractor saw.
If I guessed right, go to Woodcraft.com and purchase a PALS alignment
system for your saw (under $30 including shipping). You will now be
able to adjust your contractors saw to the tolerances you need.

I can heartily agree with that. I've got a no-name import
bought many years ago from HomeBase and I had a lot of alignment
problems till I bought the PALS system. A very simple but
elegant solution. Try it, you'll like it :-).

--
Where ARE those Iraqi WMDs?

Bob S,

I see what you're saying, but it doesn't address the problem. Bernard has it
right.

Look at it this way... Your goal is to align the blade to the miter slot.
The angle that the miter guage is set at is irrelevant... as long as the
indicator (in Silvan's case - a pencil) doesn't change position on the miter
guage as the guage is slid from front to back.

If you clamp a pencil in a miter guage set at 90 degrees, then slide the
guage from front to back, the tip of the pencil, however far out it extends,
will always be parrallel with the miter guage slot. Now, if you clamp a
pencil in a miter guage set at 13 degrees, the tip of the pencil will still
always be parrallel with the slot. I'm sorry I can;t explain it any better,
but as long as Silvan gets his blade as nearly perfect in parrallel with his
miter guage slot, then all is well.

--
Americans

"Bob S." wrote in message
news
"Yes......However".....WTF ?

Wow...what a tough friggin crowd we have here tonight. Just trying to
help
the OP and two guy's jump in looking for a fight nitpicking without
looking
at was said.

Good enough guy's - obviously I'm wrong and you two geniuses can give him
the straight answer so he can solve the problem.

Bob S.

Bob S.

I read all the posts and I didn;t see anyone nitpicking, nor did I see
anyone looking for a fight. Look, the miter guage issue is an aside. Let's
just forget that.

Silvan ALREADY KNOWS how to adjust his saw, you can tell by reading his
post. His only real problem is that, he gets his adjustment correct but then
it changes when he tightens down the hardware. This is not uncommon. About
16 years ago I adjusted mine. I bet it took me 3 hours. Once I got it where
I wanted it, I'm almost embarrassed to say, I never checked it again
(because I didn;t wnat to go through the hassle again). It performs
beautifully for me, so I don;t mess with it or check it. The point of this
little "aside" is only to say I can sympathize with Silvan's frustration.

--
Americans

"Bob S." wrote in message
.. .
Larry,

If he used a used a try square to align the miter head to the blade, the
head would be at one position (angle to the blade) and when it's holding a
pencil, it's used at the front of the blade and then at the rear. The
difference will be more/less as the gauge is moved along the blade. With
the miter aligned to the blade while it's out of adjustment and then using
it to try and align the slot to the blade is not going to work.

He could turn the miter gauge upside down in the slot and align the head
with the front edge of the table. Then reverse it and put it in the slot
upside down again at the rear edge and see if there's a difference. If
so,
then the slot is not perpendicular to the edges referenced.

So saying it doesn't make a difference is not exactly correct - right?

Bob S.


"Lawrence R Horgan" wrote in message
...
Seems to me it wouldn't matter how the miter gauge was aligned. Even if
you
had the guage at, say 29 degrees, the difference between the pencil
point
and the blade at the front or back of the blade would be the same.

Larry Blanchard wrote in message ...
In article ,
says...
From your post, I infer that you are trying to align a contractor saw.
If I guessed right, go to Woodcraft.com and purchase a PALS alignment
system for your saw (under $30 including shipping). You will now be
able to adjust your contractors saw to the tolerances you need.

I can heartily agree with that. I've got a no-name import
bought many years ago from HomeBase and I had a lot of alignment
problems till I bought the PALS system. A very simple but
elegant solution. Try it, you'll like it :-).

Let me be the third to agree. The PALS alignment gizmo will
help first to nudge the trunnion over to where you want it to
be and second to hold it there while you tighten it down.
It worked for me.
Ken

Larry,

Also read your other post below. To make the point clear, since it is not
irrelevant, the miter gauge needs to be 90° to the miter slot before any
alignment if it is the point of reference. As adjustments are being made,
(this being the key thought) the angle will change (angle of attack) and so
will the distance between the blade and reference point. He must reset
his reference point to the front of the blade and then push it forward to
check for any differences.

This is exactly what you do with a TS Aligner. You pre-load the dial gauge
at the front tooth, zero the gauge and then rotate the blade and check the
same tooth at the rear. Meanwhile, the dial gauge is being held perfectly
aligned to the miter slot. And the reference point is a small point on the
dial indicator - not a flat edge.

I agree with the statement that the miter gauge can be set at any angle and
the measurement can be taken - for that one adjustment. But... make an
adjustment to the blade in relation to the reference point and the distance
(more/less) will change. He must reset the reference point before making
the next check. Now as he stated, he was using a pencil so it has a pointy
end and the angle is not measurable between the point and the blade. If it
was a cut piece of wood as suggested, there will be an angle cut on the
reference edge of something other than 90°. As the adjustment approaches
parallel (blade to ref point) the angle and the distance between the
reference point and the blade approaches zero - front and rear - as long as
the reference edge was 90°. That's what I tried to show in the ASCII art
diagram above.

So to sum this up:

1. Use a pointy object as the reference and reset the reference after each
adjustment
2. If you use an edge (such as a cut piece of wood), it needs to be 90° to
the miter slot so as the adjustments approach being parallel, the 90° edge
of the reference point will (ideally) now be flat against the blade with no
discernable gap along the edge.
3. Buy a TS Aligner and be done with it....

As for addressing his "real" problem as you noted, I have written several
past posts that dealt with that little problem for Contractor type saws.
The information was based on a Delta, using their procedures, added some
notes and tips on info they didn't tell you in the manual plus dealing with
parts that were not milled correctly and how to compensate for some of that
"jumping" when locking it down. Most of what you read from others is about
whacking the trunnions with a hammer, using some 3rd party adjusters
add-on's etc. He didn't state whether it was a cabinet saw or a CS. But
the fix - if its a CS - is to turn the saw over, replace two of the bolts,
check and flatten the bosses on the trunnions and base, add a shim or two if
needed, clean, lube and done. Next alignment (if ever needed) is loosen the
4 bolts (now much easier) adjust by hand (no hammer needed - it slides
easily), lock it down and you're done in 15 min.

Guy's there's probably as many ways to verify alignment and perform the
alignments as there are woodworkers. I should have provided an example to
illustrate my point, like take a 12" ruler and place the end (edge) against
the edge of your bench/table/desk and its at 90° to the edge. That whole end
edge of the ruler is your reference. Cock it a bit and you have a gap and
now your reference is only the point of the ruler edge that touches the
table. As you make adjustments, that angle will change as will the
distance.

Bob S.

"Lawrence R Horgan" wrote in message
...
Bob S,

I see what you're saying, but it doesn't address the problem. Bernard has
it
right.

Look at it this way... Your goal is to align the blade to the miter slot.
The angle that the miter guage is set at is irrelevant... as long as the
indicator (in Silvan's case - a pencil) doesn't change position on the
miter
guage as the guage is slid from front to back.

If you clamp a pencil in a miter guage set at 90 degrees, then slide the
guage from front to back, the tip of the pencil, however far out it
extends,
will always be parrallel with the miter guage slot. Now, if you clamp a
pencil in a miter guage set at 13 degrees, the tip of the pencil will
still
always be parrallel with the slot. I'm sorry I can;t explain it any
better,
but as long as Silvan gets his blade as nearly perfect in parrallel with
his
miter guage slot, then all is well.

--

In article , "Bob S." wrote:
Larry,

Also read your other post below. To make the point clear, since it is not
irrelevant, the miter gauge needs to be 90° to the miter slot before any
alignment if it is the point of reference. As adjustments are being made,
(this being the key thought) the angle will change (angle of attack) and so
will the distance between the blade and reference point. He must reset
his reference point to the front of the blade and then push it forward to
check for any differences.

The angle doesn't matter, and neither does the distance of the reference
point from the front of the blade. All that matters is the *difference*
between the distance from the reference point to the front, and to the rear,
of the blade. Granted, that difference is easiest to measure when one or the
other of those distances is zero, but that is *not* required.

In any event, your point about resetting the reference point to the front of
the blade applies regardless of the angle of the miter gauge -- that is, it's
no less important with the miter gauge at 90 than with it at, say, 45.

This is exactly what you do with a TS Aligner. You pre-load the dial gauge
at the front tooth, zero the gauge and then rotate the blade and check the
same tooth at the rear. Meanwhile, the dial gauge is being held perfectly
aligned to the miter slot. And the reference point is a small point on the
dial indicator - not a flat edge.

All true. But the angle _does_not_matter_. The TS-Aligner would work just as
well (for aligning table saws, anyway), if the bar that holds the dial
indicator were mounted at a thirty-nine degree angle to the miter slot. The
path traveled by the reference point is _always_parallel_ to the miter slot,
no matter what angle the miter gauge is set at.

Consider a four-sided figure with its corners defined thus:
a) point end of a pencil clamped to miter fence and touching front of blade
b) dead-center of the miter gauge fence when pencil is touching front of blade
c) point end of same pencil when miter gauge is moved to rear of blade
d) dead-center of miter gauge fence in this latter position

These four points define a parallelogram (opposite sides are parallel). If the
miter guage is set at ninety degrees to the miter slot, that parallelogram
happens to be a rectangle. No matter the angle, the path of the pencil point
is dead parallel to the path of the miter guage and hence to the miter slot.
And thus aligning the blade to the path of the pencil guarantees that the
blade and miter slot are parallel, completely independent of the angle of the
miter gauge.

I agree with the statement that the miter gauge can be set at any angle and
the measurement can be taken - for that one adjustment. But... make an
adjustment to the blade in relation to the reference point and the distance
(more/less) will change. He must reset the reference point before making
the next check.

So? That's an artifact of having changed the angle of the miter slot relative
to the trunnion, and is completely unrelated to the angle of the miter gauge
relative to the miter slot. It makes no difference *what* the angle of the
miter gauge is, you *still* have to either reset the reference point to the
front of the blade, or measure the distance between them, before taking the
next measurement at the rear of the blade.

Now as he stated, he was using a pencil so it has a pointy
end and the angle is not measurable between the point and the blade.

The angle between the point and the blade is irrelevant. The *distance*
between them, fore and aft, is _all_that_matters_.

[snip]
So to sum this up:

1. Use a pointy object as the reference and reset the reference after each
adjustment

Bingo! *Regardless* of the angle set on the miter gauge.

2. If you use an edge (such as a cut piece of wood), it needs to be 90° to
the miter slot so as the adjustments approach being parallel, the 90° edge
of the reference point will (ideally) now be flat against the blade with no
discernable gap along the edge.

Checking for gaps fore and aft on a cut piece of wood is functionally
identical to checking the gaps at the front and back of the cut. This in turn
is functionally identical to using a "pointy object" as the reference, at two
places separated by a distance equal to the width of the cut piece -- and
unless that piece is the same width as the blade, it's guaranteed to be a less
accurate test than using a point reference at the front and rear of the blade.

And thus, if you use an edge such as a cut piece of wood, it's imperative that
the miter gauge be set at any angle _except_ 90 degrees, so that the cut piece
of wood presents a _corner_ as the reference surface instead of a flat face.

Which puts you right back to Number 1: use a point reference to start with.

3. Buy a TS Aligner and be done with it....

Works great for those who can afford it. IIRC, the OP is on a limited budget.

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

For a copy of my TrollFilter for NewsProxy/Nfilter,
send email to autoresponder at filterinfo-at-milmac-dot-com

"Bob S." wrote in message
...
Silvan,

I have to ask how you aligned your miter gauge before clamping your
reference pencil to it. That may be the error you're seeing now.

That will make no difference.

No, the angle of the gage makes no difference.
"Bob S." wrote in message
news
Larry,

Also read your other post below. To make the point clear, since it is not
irrelevant, the miter gauge needs to be 90° to the miter slot before any
alignment if it is the point of reference. As adjustments are being made,
(this being the key thought) the angle will change (angle of attack) and
so
will the distance between the blade and reference point. He must
reset
his reference point to the front of the blade and then push it forward to
check for any differences.

This is exactly what you do with a TS Aligner. You pre-load the dial
gauge
at the front tooth, zero the gauge and then rotate the blade and check the
same tooth at the rear. Meanwhile, the dial gauge is being held perfectly
aligned to the miter slot. And the reference point is a small point on the
dial indicator - not a flat edge.

I agree with the statement that the miter gauge can be set at any angle
and
the measurement can be taken - for that one adjustment. But... make an
adjustment to the blade in relation to the reference point and the
distance
(more/less) will change. He must reset the reference point before making
the next check. Now as he stated, he was using a pencil so it has a pointy
end and the angle is not measurable between the point and the blade. If it
was a cut piece of wood as suggested, there will be an angle cut on the
reference edge of something other than 90°. As the adjustment approaches
parallel (blade to ref point) the angle and the distance between the
reference point and the blade approaches zero - front and rear - as long
as
the reference edge was 90°. That's what I tried to show in the ASCII art
diagram above.

So to sum this up:

1. Use a pointy object as the reference and reset the reference after each
adjustment
2. If you use an edge (such as a cut piece of wood), it needs to be 90° to
the miter slot so as the adjustments approach being parallel, the 90° edge
of the reference point will (ideally) now be flat against the blade with
no
discernable gap along the edge.
3. Buy a TS Aligner and be done with it....

As for addressing his "real" problem as you noted, I have written several
past posts that dealt with that little problem for Contractor type saws.
The information was based on a Delta, using their procedures, added some
notes and tips on info they didn't tell you in the manual plus dealing
with
parts that were not milled correctly and how to compensate for some of
that
"jumping" when locking it down. Most of what you read from others is
about
whacking the trunnions with a hammer, using some 3rd party adjusters
add-on's etc. He didn't state whether it was a cabinet saw or a CS. But
the fix - if its a CS - is to turn the saw over, replace two of the bolts,
check and flatten the bosses on the trunnions and base, add a shim or two
if
needed, clean, lube and done. Next alignment (if ever needed) is loosen
the
4 bolts (now much easier) adjust by hand (no hammer needed - it slides
easily), lock it down and you're done in 15 min.

Guy's there's probably as many ways to verify alignment and perform the
alignments as there are woodworkers. I should have provided an example to
illustrate my point, like take a 12" ruler and place the end (edge)
against
the edge of your bench/table/desk and its at 90° to the edge. That whole
end
edge of the ruler is your reference. Cock it a bit and you have a gap and
now your reference is only the point of the ruler edge that touches the
table. As you make adjustments, that angle will change as will the
distance.

Bob S.

"Lawrence R Horgan" wrote in message
...
Bob S,

I see what you're saying, but it doesn't address the problem. Bernard
has
it
right.

Look at it this way... Your goal is to align the blade to the miter
slot.
The angle that the miter guage is set at is irrelevant... as long as the
indicator (in Silvan's case - a pencil) doesn't change position on the
miter
guage as the guage is slid from front to back.

If you clamp a pencil in a miter guage set at 90 degrees, then slide the
guage from front to back, the tip of the pencil, however far out it
extends,
will always be parrallel with the miter guage slot. Now, if you clamp a
pencil in a miter guage set at 13 degrees, the tip of the pencil will
still
always be parrallel with the slot. I'm sorry I can;t explain it any
better,
but as long as Silvan gets his blade as nearly perfect in parrallel with
his
miter guage slot, then all is well.

--

Lawrence R Horgan wrote:

Silvan ALREADY KNOWS how to adjust his saw, you can tell by reading his
post. His only real problem is that, he gets his adjustment correct but
then it changes when he tightens down the hardware. This is not uncommon.

Right. There seems to be some kind of self-centering action going on here.
To mitigate this, I tried jacking up the whole blade carriage gizmo (the
trunions?) from directly below the arbor, to keep it flush with the bottom
of the table while loosening the bolts. I wiggled it into position with
all six bolts extremely loose, and it seemed to be pretty nearly dead on
(plus or minus less than a sheet of origami paper.) Then when I tightened
everything up, it was right smack back where I started.

Good points raised elsewhere about how ripping is no indication in of
itself. My crosscuts seemed to be pretty well dead on, but then I thought
to try the *other* slot, and now I see how severe the problem is.
Crosscutting with the left slot, the results are excellent, but no cutting
or contact whatsoever takes place on the far side of the blade. Switch to
the right slot, and the work binds horribly on the far side of the cut as
the blade digs in at an angle. The resulting cut is slanted.

I could slant the fence the same way, and only use the left miter slot, but
that's not really acceptable. Back to the drawing board.

--
Michael McIntyre ---- Silvan
Linux fanatic, and certified Geek; registered Linux user #243621
http://www.geocities.com/Paris/Rue/5407/

Doug,

You're absolutely right and I dare not challenge a member of Mensa for all
the wrath that will provoke... And god forbid if anyone has an opinion that
should differ from yours.

How many tablesaws was it you said you've aligned?

Bob S.

In article , "Bob S." wrote:
Doug,

You're absolutely right and I dare not challenge a member of Mensa for all
the wrath that will provoke... And god forbid if anyone has an opinion that
should differ from yours.

If anything I said was incorrect, point out my mistake, as I pointed out
yours.

How many tablesaws was it you said you've aligned?

How many geometry tests was it you said you passed?

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

For a copy of my TrollFilter for NewsProxy/Nfilter,
send email to autoresponder at filterinfo-at-milmac-dot-com

Doug,

It was not a mistake. It was a method of doing the alignment which you
agreed with but dismissed other points to suit your arrogance and stress
that only Doug can be right.. Go back and read what was written.

Bob S.

In article , "Bob S." wrote:
Doug,

It was not a mistake. It was a method of doing the alignment which you
agreed with but dismissed other points to suit your arrogance and stress
that only Doug can be right.. Go back and read what was written.

In this case, I *am* right. And you are not.

*You* go back and read it. The only thing I "dismissed" was your repeated, and
utterly mistaken, contention that the angle of the miter gauge makes any
difference at all in the alignment procedure.

You said, "god forbid if anyone has an opinion that should differ from yours".
However, this is not a matter of opinion, but a matter of mathematical *fact*.

It is equally a matter of fact, not of opinion, that your statements on the
subject are incorrect. If you find it "arrogant" of me to point it out, so be
it. I note that I am not the only one to have done so.

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

For a copy of my TrollFilter for NewsProxy/Nfilter,
send email to autoresponder at filterinfo-at-milmac-dot-com

You are right Doug....now go soak your head...it's swelling up quite a bit.

Bob S.

In article , "Bob S." wrote:
You are right Doug....now go soak your head...it's swelling up quite a bit.

Does this mean you're going to stop posting that nonsense that nobody but you
agrees with?

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

For a copy of my TrollFilter for NewsProxy/Nfilter,
send email to autoresponder at filterinfo-at-milmac-dot-com

Lawrence R Horgan wrote:

Silvan ALREADY KNOWS how to adjust his saw, you can tell by reading his

Crikey. What a mess I started!

OK, let's try this on for size. I got a dial indicator, and I bought four
cap screws. I'm going to fabricate my own version of the PALS system for
$2 in materials (using angle iron I already have) and see if that works. I
think it just might.

--
Michael McIntyre ---- Silvan
Linux fanatic, and certified Geek; registered Linux user #243621
http://www.geocities.com/Paris/Rue/5407/

I've been watching this thread with some intent now, because it's kinda
funny. Silvan, it's been so long since I've seen the original post, what
kind of saw is it? Is it possible the trunion bolts have molded (for lack of
a better word) themselves to the trunion, making indentions in it, causing
it to go back to the same location? Could you not try different size washers
on the bolts? It sort of makes sense to me. BTW, who do you drive for? I
know your a stick hauler.

--
"Cartoons don't have any deep meaning.
They're just stupid drawings that give you a cheap laugh."
Homer Simpson
Jerry© The Phoneman®
"Silvan" wrote in message
...
Lawrence R Horgan wrote:

Silvan ALREADY KNOWS how to adjust his saw, you can tell by reading his

Crikey. What a mess I started!

OK, let's try this on for size. I got a dial indicator, and I bought four
cap screws. I'm going to fabricate my own version of the PALS system for
$2 in materials (using angle iron I already have) and see if that works.
I
think it just might.

--
Michael McIntyre ---- Silvan
Linux fanatic, and certified Geek; registered Linux user #243621
http://www.geocities.com/Paris/Rue/5407/

Doug,

If you had read what was written instead of trying to prove someone is wrong
all the time, it may have dawned on you that I did not state the miter
couldn't be at any other angle. But why would you align a saw with it not
set at 90° is beyond me. You turned it into a point that I was wrong and
that you were right and so damn righteous about it too. Nobody can be
better than Doug at anything it appears and you certainly went to great
lengths to prove that today.

As far as it being nonsense Doug, go look at some of the posts you've made.
Instead of you trying to be helpful - you're always the one to try and play
one-upmanship instead of offering help.

You sir, are a total, arrogant butt-head and that's being kind. Now, go
align a tablesaw and come back when you can offer some real advice to the
person asking the question instead of jumping in on another's response and
doing your best to prove it wrong.

Bob S.

Michael,

I'm sure the genius will jump on in here and correct me but before that
happens consider that by using the PALS you may be masking the problem. The
alignment of the saw depends on the undercarriage being square and true to
the table. Bosses on the trunnions must be flat, the tie-bar alignment must
not be putting torque on the trunnions and other adjustments come into play
to insure the alignment is correct or you'll forever be fighting it.

Advise you to do a search on "tablesaw alignments" . Here's one that Steve
Strickland wrote http://www.puzzlecraft.com/Projects/HTMAP/07saw.htm that
may help open your eyes to what is at play.

It's a good article and doing a search will uncover many more for you to get
ideas. As I said earlier, do yourself a favor and turn the table over and
fix the problem - don't mask it and introduce more problems.

Bob S.

"Silvan" wrote in message
...
Lawrence R Horgan wrote:

Silvan ALREADY KNOWS how to adjust his saw, you can tell by reading his

Crikey. What a mess I started!

OK, let's try this on for size. I got a dial indicator, and I bought four
cap screws. I'm going to fabricate my own version of the PALS system for
$2 in materials (using angle iron I already have) and see if that works.
I
think it just might.

--
Michael McIntyre ---- Silvan
Linux fanatic, and certified Geek; registered Linux user #243621
http://www.geocities.com/Paris/Rue/5407/

"Bob S." wrote in message
...
Advise you to do a search on "tablesaw alignments" . Here's one that Steve
Strickland wrote http://www.puzzlecraft.com/Projects/HTMAP/07saw.htm that
may help open your eyes to what is at play.

Yes, that explains a lot.
There's your problem.Listen to the puzzle guy and you'll be all screwed up.

Silvan,

After re-reading your post I see that it is a new saw, as such I would be
very inclined to return it to the vendor and have him fix the problem.

Personally I have never liked using a miter gauge for cross cutting I just
don't think there is enough support and the actual fulcrum point is too far
away from the blade. My own saw is a sliding table and I have a 40" home
made fence, however when I was working abroad and used the company's hobby
shop, I made a sled and that works resonably well, certainly much better and
safer than a single miter gauge.

Bernard R

"Silvan" wrote in message
...
I'm trying to line up my new saw as best I can without buying any fancy
dongles to take ultra precise measurements.

Today's project was getting the blade lined up parallel to the miter
slots.
I sharpened a pencil to a tiny point, marked a tooth, then clamped the
pencil to my miter gauge. Moving pencil and tooth to the back of the
table, there was a significant gap.

After dicking around with the six bolts and wiggling around on the saw
guts
for a couple of hours, the best I was able to accomplish is that there is
still a 0.014" gap between the pencil point and the marked tooth at the
back of the table. I could never manage to get it closer than that and
keep it there while the bolts were tightened back up.

Unfortunately, the gap indicates that the blade is closer to the rip fence
at the back than at the front, which is really seriously not cool. Still,
I don't see what else I can do about it. This was the product of much
fiddling, and it was hard to get it even this close. (BTW, the rip fence
is to the right of the blade. I was using the left miter slot.)

I don't have much lumber on hand to do test cuts with, but I tried a piece
of 4/4 red oak about 3' long. I ripped a strip 1" wide and measured it at
various points with dial calipers. It's damn close. The difference in
measurement from point to point is less than I can measure without a
micrometer, though there *is* some minute variation. Theer were no burn
marks at all, no binding, no feeling of impending kickback, and it was a
very smooth cut.

So what does the Wreck say? Keep dicking with it or leave it alone until
I
see burn marks and other indications of a serious alignment problem?
Maybe
try some 6/4 or larger and see how that changes things...

--
Michael McIntyre ---- Silvan
Linux fanatic, and certified Geek; registered Linux user #243621
http://www.geocities.com/Paris/Rue/5407/

Silvan wrote:

Lawrence R Horgan wrote:

Silvan ALREADY KNOWS how to adjust his saw, you can tell by reading his

Crikey. What a mess I started!

OK, let's try this on for size. I got a dial indicator, and I bought four
cap screws. I'm going to fabricate my own version of the PALS system for
$2 in materials (using angle iron I already have) and see if that works. I
think it just might.

Probably. I had to file my PALS brackets (Delta CS model) to make them
fit properly.