I've got a notion to build a couple of wardrobes for our bedroom. As an
idea, it has scarcely reached the "half-assed" stage. There's no set
design yet. They would be roughly 32W x 24D x 84H. As there's no way to
carry objects that size through the house, I would need to make two
boxes for each unit, to be stacked on top of each other on site. That
would probably necessitate installing the face frame on site as well.

My question involves materials. The wardrobes would be tall, well above
eye-level, and would be located in two corners of the room. As such, the
only surfaces that would show would be the doors, the face frame and one
side of each unit.

I've taken an awful long time to get decent results finishing much
smaller projects. I haven't got the time or gumption to take on the
finishing of something as big as this. So I'm considering prefinished
plywood, or possibly even melamine for the basic boxes, with a
prefinished ply panel on the visible side. Is melamine a nighmare for a
relative novice?

As for the doors, I'm not sure what to do yet. We have a couple of
similar wardrobes that have "faux" panel doors made of flat 3/4" ply
with 2"x1/4" strips appliqued on to simulate vertical 3-panel doors. (I
didn't build them).

I did build some simple panel doors for another project, but they were a
good bit smaller. I could conceivably use thin prefinished ply with
solid frames. Either way I would somehow need to finish the face frames
and door frames (and perhaps some molding at the top and bottom)for a
reasonable match, and without getting any of the finish on the
prefinished material. Presumably I'd finish those pieces before
installing them. I'm wondering if a deliberate contrast might be easier
for me to accomplish than a "match".

I'm asking for basic pointers, pros and cons, pitfalls a weekend warrior
like me is likely to stumble into, etc. My goal is to make something
functional and decent-looking in a reasonable amount of time.

As always, thanks in advance.

Greg Guarino wrote:
I've got a notion to build a couple of wardrobes for our bedroom. As
an idea, it has scarcely reached the "half-assed" stage. There's no
set design yet. They would be roughly 32W x 24D x 84H. As there's no
way to carry objects that size through the house, I would need to
make two boxes for each unit, to be stacked on top of each other on
site. That would probably necessitate installing the face frame on
site as well.
My question involves materials. The wardrobes would be tall, well
above eye-level, and would be located in two corners of the room. As
such, the only surfaces that would show would be the doors, the face
frame and one side of each unit.

I've taken an awful long time to get decent results finishing much
smaller projects. I haven't got the time or gumption to take on the
finishing of something as big as this. So I'm considering prefinished
plywood, or possibly even melamine for the basic boxes, with a
prefinished ply panel on the visible side. Is melamine a nighmare for
a relative novice?

As for the doors, I'm not sure what to do yet. We have a couple of
similar wardrobes that have "faux" panel doors made of flat 3/4" ply
with 2"x1/4" strips appliqued on to simulate vertical 3-panel doors.
(I didn't build them).

I did build some simple panel doors for another project, but they
were a good bit smaller. I could conceivably use thin prefinished ply
with solid frames. Either way I would somehow need to finish the face
frames and door frames (and perhaps some molding at the top and
bottom)for a reasonable match, and without getting any of the finish
on the prefinished material. Presumably I'd finish those pieces before
installing them. I'm wondering if a deliberate contrast might be
easier for me to accomplish than a "match".

I'm asking for basic pointers, pros and cons, pitfalls a weekend
warrior like me is likely to stumble into, etc. My goal is to make
something functional and decent-looking in a reasonable amount of
time.
As always, thanks in advance.

1. You should be able to move an object that size through normal interior
doors. Moving might fail, though, if you have tight corners such as a
stairway.

2. You raise some interesting questions. If it were me, I'd scour the web
for wardrobe plans. No sense trying to be a pioneer or re-invent the wheels.
I've gotten some terrific ideas from looking at what others have done.

Greg Guarino wrote:


I've taken an awful long time to get decent results finishing much
smaller projects. I haven't got the time or gumption to take on the
finishing of something as big as this. So I'm considering prefinished
plywood, or possibly even melamine for the basic boxes, with a
prefinished ply panel on the visible side. Is melamine a nighmare for
a relative novice?


I think pre-finished is going to require just as much effort Greg - or maybe
more. You'll have to apply a veneer of some sort of tape to finish the
edges, and that will require work to finish off. I think you'll end up
finding that simple sanding and applying stain and poly will be as simple an
approach as any alternative. And - it will last. It's really not as much
work as it may seem to you at first blush.


As for the doors, I'm not sure what to do yet. We have a couple of
similar wardrobes that have "faux" panel doors made of flat 3/4" ply
with 2"x1/4" strips appliqued on to simulate vertical 3-panel doors.
(I didn't build them).

Well - you could try to replicate them, but you'll still be back to that
finishing stuff I spoke of above.


I did build some simple panel doors for another project, but they
were a good bit smaller. I could conceivably use thin prefinished ply
with solid frames.

Just not understanding your preference for prefinished ply. You still have
to dress up the edges after you cut it - right?

Either way I would somehow need to finish the face
frames and door frames (and perhaps some molding at the top and
bottom)for a reasonable match, and without getting any of the finish
on the prefinished material.

Ergo the simple route of just finishing the entire project. It's not as
much as you may fear it is.

Presumably I'd finish those pieces before
installing them. I'm wondering if a deliberate contrast might be
easier for me to accomplish than a "match".

If you want it to look like it does not match... and then you can try to
fool people by telling them you did that intentionally... It's all a matter
of taste though. I've seen some top notch woodworkers turn out pieces in
contrasting woods. I always thought that look was horrible, but... it's a
matter of taste.



I'm asking for basic pointers, pros and cons, pitfalls a weekend
warrior like me is likely to stumble into, etc. My goal is to make
something functional and decent-looking in a reasonable amount of
time.

Just look at what your defintion of "a reasonable amount of time" is. Don't
sell it short. So what if it takes you a week of your spare time to get it
done? Is it more important to get it done in an evening? It will certainly
look like that's what you did if you go that route. Sometimes we get
ourselves psyched into a position even before we start a project...


--

-Mike-

On Wed, 12 Sep 2012 18:40:43 -0400, Mike Marlow wrote:

I think you'll end
up finding that simple sanding and applying stain and poly will be as
simple an approach as any alternative.

Or, if the wood itself looks good (walnut, maple, or cherry plywood),
just some wipe-on poly or shellac wiped on with a pad is hard to mess up.

--
When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and
carrying a cross.

Greg Guarino wrote:
I've got a notion to build a couple of wardrobes for our bedroom. As
an idea, it has scarcely reached the "half-assed" stage. There's no
set design yet. They would be roughly 32W x 24D x 84H. As there's no
way to carry objects that size through the house, I would need to
make two boxes for each unit, to be stacked on top of each other on
site. That would probably necessitate installing the face frame on
site as well.

If you reduce the height to less than 80" I would think you could get them
through the house (assuming standard door height). If you are worried about
the weight, roll them on dowels or lengths of PVC pipe.
__________________

My question involves materials. The wardrobes would be tall, well
above eye-level, and would be located in two corners of the room. As
such, the only surfaces that would show would be the doors, the face
frame and one side of each unit.

I've taken an awful long time to get decent results finishing much
smaller projects. I haven't got the time or gumption to take on the
finishing of something as big as this. So I'm considering prefinished
plywood, or possibly even melamine for the basic boxes, with a
prefinished ply panel on the visible side. Is melamine a nighmare for
a relative novice?

Melamine isn't much different than ply. Both tend to chip when crosscut,
the mel in any direction. Both need something applied to visible edges.

One can mitigate the chipping by joining with tongues into dados; IOW, hide
it. I use 1/2" wide tongues with 1/8" shoulders into 3/8" deep dados or
rabbets.

The iron on tape for mel board is easy to apply.
___________________

As for the doors, I'm not sure what to do yet. We have a couple of
similar wardrobes that have "faux" panel doors made of flat 3/4" ply
with 2"x1/4" strips appliqued on to simulate vertical 3-panel doors.
(I didn't build them).

I did build some simple panel doors for another project, but they
were a good bit smaller.

You are going to make two boxes, stacked so make doors for each box. That
would be simpler than trying to make 84" doors. Just make one box high
enough to hang whatever you want to hang.
_____________

I could conceivably use thin prefinished ply
with solid frames. Either way I would somehow need to finish the face
frames and door frames (and perhaps some molding at the top and
bottom)for a reasonable match, and without getting any of the finish
on the prefinished material. Presumably I'd finish those pieces before
installing them. I'm wondering if a deliberate contrast might be
easier for me to accomplish than a "match".

Masking tape and reasonable care keep finish off of adjacent areas.
_________________

I'm asking for basic pointers, pros and cons, pitfalls a weekend
warrior like me is likely to stumble into, etc. My goal is to make
something functional and decent-looking in a reasonable amount of
time.

We have two large walk in closets, his and hers. Mostly, they are for
hanging but I made a wardrobe with shelves for each. They are about the
size of yours but are about 24" shorter.

I used eastern red cedar for the cases...easy to work, relatively
inexpensive and smells good. And, no reason to finish it (especially
inside). I used butternut for the face frames and doors as I had it but
there is no reason I couldn't have used the cedar. Had I used cedar I would
have probably used an acrylic sealer like Seal-Krete on the outside of
doors/FF just to help them shed finger oils and dust.

Using lumber, you have to glue up the boards to make the panels. I don't
find that much more time consuming than messing with ply wood and its ugly
edges. One can also make solid, overlay doors, much easier than frame &
panel and they look fine.



--

dadiOH
____________________________

Winters getting colder? Tired of the rat race?
Maybe just ready for a change? Check it out...
http://www.floridaloghouse.net

On 9/12/2012 6:03 PM, HeyBub wrote:
1. You should be able to move an object that size through normal interior
doors. Moving might fail, though, if you have tight corners such as a
stairway.


Yup. That's what I've got.

2. You raise some interesting questions. If it were me, I'd scour the web
for wardrobe plans. No sense trying to be a pioneer or re-invent the wheels.
I've gotten some terrific ideas from looking at what others have done.

Sounds like a good idea.

dadiOH wrote:
Greg Guarino wrote:
I've got a notion to build a couple of wardrobes for our bedroom. As
an idea, it has scarcely reached the "half-assed" stage. There's no
set design yet. They would be roughly 32W x 24D x 84H. As there's no
way to carry objects that size through the house, I would need to
make two boxes for each unit, to be stacked on top of each other on
site. That would probably necessitate installing the face frame on
site as well.

If you reduce the height to less than 80" I would think you could get
them through the house (assuming standard door height). If you are
worried about the weight, roll them on dowels or lengths of PVC pipe.
__________________

My question involves materials. The wardrobes would be tall, well
above eye-level, and would be located in two corners of the room. As
such, the only surfaces that would show would be the doors, the face
frame and one side of each unit.

I've taken an awful long time to get decent results finishing much
smaller projects. I haven't got the time or gumption to take on the
finishing of something as big as this. So I'm considering prefinished
plywood, or possibly even melamine for the basic boxes, with a
prefinished ply panel on the visible side. Is melamine a nighmare for
a relative novice?

Melamine isn't much different than ply. Both tend to chip when
crosscut, the mel in any direction. Both need something applied to
visible edges.
One can mitigate the chipping by joining with tongues into dados;
IOW, hide it. I use 1/2" wide tongues with 1/8" shoulders into 3/8"
deep dados or rabbets.

The iron on tape for mel board is easy to apply.
___________________

As for the doors, I'm not sure what to do yet. We have a couple of
similar wardrobes that have "faux" panel doors made of flat 3/4" ply
with 2"x1/4" strips appliqued on to simulate vertical 3-panel doors.
(I didn't build them).

I did build some simple panel doors for another project, but they
were a good bit smaller.

You are going to make two boxes, stacked so make doors for each box. That
would be simpler than trying to make 84" doors. Just make one
box high enough to hang whatever you want to hang.
_____________

I could conceivably use thin prefinished ply
with solid frames. Either way I would somehow need to finish the face
frames and door frames (and perhaps some molding at the top and
bottom)for a reasonable match, and without getting any of the finish
on the prefinished material. Presumably I'd finish those pieces
before installing them. I'm wondering if a deliberate contrast might
be easier for me to accomplish than a "match".

Masking tape and reasonable care keep finish off of adjacent areas.
_________________

I'm asking for basic pointers, pros and cons, pitfalls a weekend
warrior like me is likely to stumble into, etc. My goal is to make
something functional and decent-looking in a reasonable amount of
time.

We have two large walk in closets, his and hers. Mostly, they are for
hanging but I made a wardrobe with shelves for each. They are about
the size of yours but are about 24" shorter.

I used eastern red cedar for the cases...easy to work, relatively
inexpensive and smells good. And, no reason to finish it (especially
inside). I used butternut for the face frames and doors as I had it
but there is no reason I couldn't have used the cedar. Had I used
cedar I would have probably used an acrylic sealer like Seal-Krete on
the outside of doors/FF just to help them shed finger oils and dust.

Using lumber, you have to glue up the boards to make the panels. I
don't find that much more time consuming than messing with ply wood
and its ugly edges. One can also make solid, overlay doors, much
easier than frame & panel and they look fine.

Another easy way to finish sheet goods is with wallpaper. Can't do that on
mel but can on particle board. Outside, an applied molding can make it look
like a panel.

--

dadiOH
____________________________

Winters getting colder? Tired of the rat race?
Maybe just ready for a change? Check it out...
http://www.floridaloghouse.net

On 9/12/2012 6:40 PM, Mike Marlow wrote:
Greg Guarino wrote:


I've taken an awful long time to get decent results finishing much
smaller projects. I haven't got the time or gumption to take on the
finishing of something as big as this. So I'm considering prefinished
plywood, or possibly even melamine for the basic boxes, with a
prefinished ply panel on the visible side. Is melamine a nighmare for
a relative novice?


I think pre-finished is going to require just as much effort Greg - or maybe
more. You'll have to apply a veneer of some sort of tape to finish the
edges, and that will require work to finish off.

Assuming I use ply, finished or not, I'll need to dress up the edges. I
had planned on a face frame (solid wood). But that would mean finishing
a few dozen feet of narrow stock, as opposed to doing that *in addition*
to sanding and finishing the better part of five or six sheets of
unfinished ply. (much of it on both sides)

I think you'll end up
finding that simple sanding and applying stain and poly will be as simple an
approach as any alternative. And - it will last.

Is it your opinion that the finish on prefinished ply is less durable?

It's really not as much
work as it may seem to you at first blush.

My skills are modest, but I've had a small amount of experience. This
would be four or five times the surface area of anything I've done
before, and those smaller projects took a very long time. Of course, I
was doing multiple coats, with sanding or steel wool in-between. I can't
imagine doing that on such a large project, especially on the inside.
I'm sure that the people that made our other armoires used a sprayer,
but that's not an option for me.

As for the doors, I'm not sure what to do yet. We have a couple of
similar wardrobes that have "faux" panel doors made of flat 3/4" ply
with 2"x1/4" strips appliqued on to simulate vertical 3-panel doors.
(I didn't build them).

Well - you could try to replicate them, but you'll still be back to that
finishing stuff I spoke of above.


I did build some simple panel doors for another project, but they
were a good bit smaller. I could conceivably use thin prefinished ply
with solid frames.

Just not understanding your preference for prefinished ply. You still have
to dress up the edges after you cut it - right?

As I would with unfinished ply, but the bulk of the project would need
no finishing.

Either way I would somehow need to finish the face
frames and door frames (and perhaps some molding at the top and
bottom)for a reasonable match, and without getting any of the finish
on the prefinished material.

Ergo the simple route of just finishing the entire project. It's not as
much as you may fear it is.

In my place, what method would you use? How many coats, and of what
product? I have not tried wiping poly yet, which I believe might make
sanding between coats unnecessary, but I hear you need a bunch of coats.

Presumably I'd finish those pieces before
installing them. I'm wondering if a deliberate contrast might be
easier for me to accomplish than a "match".

If you want it to look like it does not match... and then you can try to
fool people by telling them you did that intentionally... It's all a matter
of taste though. I've seen some top notch woodworkers turn out pieces in
contrasting woods. I always thought that look was horrible, but... it's a
matter of taste.



I'm asking for basic pointers, pros and cons, pitfalls a weekend
warrior like me is likely to stumble into, etc. My goal is to make
something functional and decent-looking in a reasonable amount of
time.

Just look at what your defintion of "a reasonable amount of time" is. Don't
sell it short. So what if it takes you a week of your spare time to get it
done? Is it more important to get it done in an evening?

I'm afraid you overestimate my skill and efficiency. I'd be lucky to cut
and assemble the units in a few days. But the finishing has always been
the most time-consuming part.

It will certainly
look like that's what you did if you go that route. Sometimes we get
ourselves psyched into a position even before we start a project...

"Greg Guarino" wrote in message ...

I've got a notion to build a couple of wardrobes for our bedroom. As an
idea, it has scarcely reached the "half-assed" stage. There's no set
design yet. They would be roughly 32W x 24D x 84H. As there's no way to
carry objects that size through the house, I would need to make two
boxes for each unit, to be stacked on top of each other on site. That
would probably necessitate installing the face frame on site as well.


Greg.. This brings back memories. Building kitchen cabinets for our new
house. Same dimensions as your cabinet. Ceiling height was 84 inches. Got it
into the kitchen OK. Went to stand it up. No go. Forgot the top to bottom
diagonal was more than 84 inches. Cut height down and made a toe kick
section to slide under. Lesson learned. this was in 1970. I still have a lot
to learn and this site is great learning from the experts. WW

On 9/13/2012 8:23 AM, Greg Guarino wrote:
On 9/12/2012 6:03 PM, HeyBub wrote:
1. You should be able to move an object that size through normal interior
doors. Moving might fail, though, if you have tight corners such as a
stairway.


Yup. That's what I've got.
....

The suggestion is to have it short enough it'll clear any obstruction in
the fully upright uncomfortable position...

--

On 9/13/2012 11:40 AM, WW wrote:


"Greg Guarino" wrote in message ...

I've got a notion to build a couple of wardrobes for our bedroom. As an
idea, it has scarcely reached the "half-assed" stage. There's no set
design yet. They would be roughly 32W x 24D x 84H. As there's no way to
carry objects that size through the house, I would need to make two
boxes for each unit, to be stacked on top of each other on site. That
would probably necessitate installing the face frame on site as well.


Greg.. This brings back memories. Building kitchen cabinets for our new
house. Same dimensions as your cabinet. Ceiling height was 84 inches.
Got it into the kitchen OK. Went to stand it up. No go. Forgot the top
to bottom diagonal was more than 84 inches. Cut height down and made a
toe kick section to slide under. Lesson learned. this was in 1970. I
still have a lot to learn and this site is great learning from the
experts. WW

I'm probably better at geometry than I am at woodworking. My ceiling is
8'. I figure to make the wardrobes well short of that.

Greg Guarino wrote:
On 9/12/2012 6:03 PM, HeyBub wrote:
1. You should be able to move an object that size through normal
interior doors. Moving might fail, though, if you have tight corners
such as a stairway.


Yup. That's what I've got.

Take a second look. Are you certain they won't navigate your openings, or
are you worried that they won't. Most objects will with a little twisting
and turning. Think about how those guys deliver furniture to every kind of
house imaginable. I'll bet you can get your pieces to where you need...


--

-Mike-

Greg Guarino wrote:


Assuming I use ply, finished or not, I'll need to dress up the edges.
I had planned on a face frame (solid wood). But that would mean
finishing a few dozen feet of narrow stock, as opposed to doing that
*in addition* to sanding and finishing the better part of five or six
sheets of unfinished ply. (much of it on both sides)


Ok - I may have misunderstood your original position. I did not realize you
were thinking of building a face frame. For the sides, I would agree on a
nice ply. Pre-finished? Still don't know I'd go there. It takes only
minutes to sand a sheet and to apply a finish that will match your frames.
It's not like we're talking about a lot of extra work.


I think you'll end up
finding that simple sanding and applying stain and poly will be as
simple an approach as any alternative. And - it will last.

Is it your opinion that the finish on prefinished ply is less durable?

No - not really. I think I threw that last comment in as a rhetorical
statement. I can do that sometimes...


It's really not as much
work as it may seem to you at first blush.

My skills are modest, but I've had a small amount of experience. This
would be four or five times the surface area of anything I've done
before, and those smaller projects took a very long time. Of course, I
was doing multiple coats, with sanding or steel wool in-between. I
can't imagine doing that on such a large project, especially on the
inside. I'm sure that the people that made our other armoires used a
sprayer, but that's not an option for me.

Understand. It will indeed take a little time, but if you think about it,
it's really not all that much time. Run the numbers (time wise) before you
let yourself get too worried about what it may require. I'll bet you'll be
surprised.


Just not understanding your preference for prefinished ply. You
still have to dress up the edges after you cut it - right?

As I would with unfinished ply, but the bulk of the project would need
no finishing.

So - if you are building face frames, it's really not an issue since the
edges of the ply will marry to the back side of the face frames - and be
unseen.


In my place, what method would you use? How many coats, and of what
product? I have not tried wiping poly yet, which I believe might make
sanding between coats unnecessary, but I hear you need a bunch of
coats.

I don't use wiping poly. Leon is a great source of expertise on that. Just
be careful when taking Leon's advise. He'll steer you to some expensive
Festool tool that will do the job better, cleaner and... well... more
expensively...

I brush on. Then, I scuff it the next day, and put on a second coat. After
that - it gets nailed. Scuffing takes minutes. it's not a big job.




I'm afraid you overestimate my skill and efficiency. I'd be lucky to
cut and assemble the units in a few days. But the finishing has
always been the most time-consuming part.

Yup - it is. Get used to that. Perhaps you can even fool yourself into
believing it is the most fun part - but that's just fooling one's self!


--

-Mike-

dpb wrote:
On 9/13/2012 8:23 AM, Greg Guarino wrote:
On 9/12/2012 6:03 PM, HeyBub wrote:
1. You should be able to move an object that size through normal
interior doors. Moving might fail, though, if you have tight
corners such as a stairway.


Yup. That's what I've got.
...

The suggestion is to have it short enough it'll clear any obstruction
in the fully upright uncomfortable position...

I disagree. Twisting and turning something like that to clear is not such
an ordeal. It's sorta normal.

--

-Mike-

On 9/12/2012 1:50 PM, Greg Guarino wrote:
I've got a notion to build a couple of wardrobes for our bedroom. As an
idea, it has scarcely reached the "half-assed" stage. There's no set
design yet. They would be roughly 32W x 24D x 84H. As there's no way to
carry objects that size through the house, I would need to make two
boxes for each unit, to be stacked on top of each other on site. That
would probably necessitate installing the face frame on site as well.

1. Buy a Kreg jig
2. Buy pre-finished 3/4 plywood
3. Build the boxes
4. Build a sub base to set cabinet on.
4. Build a face frame
5. Finish with gel stain and varnish.

The face frame is optional depending on your taste.

No face frame means flush mounted doors.

You need four doors for a cabinet that tall in my opinion.

You might also consider a wardrobe on top and drawers on the
bottom.

Like this:

http://www.sauder.com/furniture/product.asp?p=1359

On 9/13/2012 7:47 AM, dadiOH wrote:
One can mitigate the chipping by joining with tongues into dados; IOW, hide
it. I use 1/2" wide tongues with 1/8" shoulders into 3/8" deep dados or
rabbets.

My Dad used to make shelf units with what I'll call "full" dadoes,
meaning that if the shelf was 3/4" thick, the dado would be 3/4" also.
Could you explain, for the uninitiated, the advantage of making a
thinner "tongue"? Does it leave the uprights stronger? Or is it cosmetic
in some way?

On 9/13/2012 1:03 PM, Mike Marlow wrote:
....

I disagree. Twisting and turning something like that to clear is not such
an ordeal. It's sorta normal.

Well, if OP says he has an obstruction in the path, then I presume he
knows his home better than I.

--

On 9/13/2012 2:47 PM, Pat Barber wrote:
On 9/12/2012 1:50 PM, Greg Guarino wrote:
I've got a notion to build a couple of wardrobes for our bedroom. As an
idea, it has scarcely reached the "half-assed" stage. There's no set
design yet. They would be roughly 32W x 24D x 84H. As there's no way to
carry objects that size through the house, I would need to make two
boxes for each unit, to be stacked on top of each other on site. That
would probably necessitate installing the face frame on site as well.

1. Buy a Kreg jig
2. Buy pre-finished 3/4 plywood
3. Build the boxes
4. Build a sub base to set cabinet on.
4. Build a face frame

Well, that's remarkably like what I was planning, if the word "planning"
can be applied to the random musing that I've done so far.

5. Finish with gel stain and varnish.

Haven't tried gel stain yet. But I have lots of scrap pieces, many of
which already have test finishes on them. Time to make some more I guess.


The face frame is optional depending on your taste.

No face frame means flush mounted doors.

You need four doors for a cabinet that tall in my opinion.

I had some similar cabinets made some years ago. They have two
full-height vertical doors. As I mentioned before, they are "faux" panel
style, 3/4" ply with 2" x 1/4" strips glued on to mimic three vertical
panels. I haven't had any trouble with those doors, perhaps because they
are essentially a solid piece of relatively thick plywood. Are you
suggesting that a tall true panel door might warp?

You might also consider a wardrobe on top and drawers on the
bottom.

Like this:

http://www.sauder.com/furniture/product.asp?p=1359

That's pretty handsome looking. I might consider something like that, if
I can get over my fear of drawers.

Greg Guarino wrote in news:k2qsit$o9n$1@dont-
email.me:

Snip

I made some cabinets for an entertainment center using maple plywood, and
some 1/4x1" maple strips as "banding". It was a pain to get them down to
be even on both sides with the plywood. The iron-on maple banding veneer
was much easier. Finished with blondest shellac as a seal coat, plus a
couple more coats. Then shellac- alkyd(?)poly mix, and finally poly-
pastewax mix with a touch of shellac. The latter a couple of coats. Then
rubbing, and the finish is looking like it will last.
--
Best regards
Han
email address is invalid

On 9/13/2012 3:46 PM, Han wrote:
Greg Guarino wrote in news:k2qsit$o9n$1@dont-
email.me:

Snip

I made some cabinets for an entertainment center using maple plywood, and
some 1/4x1" maple strips as "banding". It was a pain to get them down to
be even on both sides with the plywood.

I think I can be of some assistance here, which is rare given my modest
knowledge. I used a rabbet plane for a similar job. I set the fence on
the plane to the thickness of the edge piece, so I couldn't accidentally
cut into the face of the plywood. Then I set the depth stop so that the
plane would cut the edge piece exactly flush with the surface of the
ply. Someone with more developed skills might be able to do this by
"feel", but it worked nicely for me.

The iron-on maple banding veneer
was much easier. Finished with blondest shellac as a seal coat, plus a
couple more coats. Then shellac- alkyd(?)poly mix, and finally poly-
pastewax mix with a touch of shellac. The latter a couple of coats. Then
rubbing, and the finish is looking like it will last.


I have to say, that looks like an argument for prefinished ply, at least
for a busy guy with limited skills. I count six or seven steps,
something I might try on a smaller project, but not on this one.

Greg Guarino wrote in
:

On 9/13/2012 3:46 PM, Han wrote:
Greg Guarino wrote in news:k2qsit$o9n$1@dont-
email.me:

Snip

I made some cabinets for an entertainment center using maple plywood,
and some 1/4x1" maple strips as "banding". It was a pain to get them
down to be even on both sides with the plywood.

I think I can be of some assistance here, which is rare given my
modest knowledge. I used a rabbet plane for a similar job. I set the
fence on the plane to the thickness of the edge piece, so I couldn't
accidentally cut into the face of the plywood. Then I set the depth
stop so that the plane would cut the edge piece exactly flush with the
surface of the ply. Someone with more developed skills might be able
to do this by "feel", but it worked nicely for me.

Great idea for a needed tool I don't yet have! Thanks!! Which brand and
model do you have?

The iron-on maple banding veneer
was much easier. Finished with blondest shellac as a seal coat, plus
a couple more coats. Then shellac- alkyd(?)poly mix, and finally
poly- pastewax mix with a touch of shellac. The latter a couple of
coats. Then rubbing, and the finish is looking like it will last.


I have to say, that looks like an argument for prefinished ply, at
least for a busy guy with limited skills. I count six or seven steps,
something I might try on a smaller project, but not on this one.

Well, I do take my (retired) time, that is true, but shellac dries in
minutes, so several caots go on really fast. The other coats don't take
that much time either. So for me a little more time is fine, versus the
(likely) expense of prefinished ply. Although, maple ply of good quaity
isn't exactly cheap.

--
Best regards
Han
email address is invalid

Greg Guarino wrote in news:k2t1nd$ci4$1@dont-
email.me:


I'm probably better at geometry than I am at woodworking. My ceiling is
8'. I figure to make the wardrobes well short of that.


This is where making a mock up might come in handy. If you take two pieces
of cardboard, one to represent the base and one to represent the largest
side, and move it through the area you'll get a feel for how it will fit.

If size is still a concern, there's all kinds of "knock down" style
fasteners that will allow you to finish the project in the shop,
disassemble it and reassemble in the house.

Puckdropper
--
Make it to fit, don't make it fit.

On Sep 13, 5:59*pm, Puckdropper puckdropper(at)yahoo(dot)com wrote:


If size is still a concern, there's all kinds of "knock down" style
fasteners that will allow you to finish the project in the shop,
disassemble it and reassemble in the house.

There's something I hadn't thought of. Any pointers to a source?

On Sep 13, 5:24*pm, Han wrote:
Greg Guarino wrote :









On 9/13/2012 3:46 PM, Han wrote:
Greg Guarino wrote innews:k2qsit$o9n$1@dont-
email.me:

Snip

I made some cabinets for an entertainment center using maple plywood,
and some 1/4x1" maple strips as "banding". *It was a pain to get them
down to be even on both sides with the plywood.

I think I can be of some assistance here, which is rare given my
modest knowledge. I used a rabbet plane for a similar job. I set the
fence on the plane to the thickness of the edge piece, so I couldn't
accidentally cut into the face of the plywood. Then I set the depth
stop so that the plane would cut the edge piece exactly flush with the
surface of the ply. Someone with more developed skills might be able
to do this by "feel", but it worked nicely for me.

Great idea for a needed tool I don't yet have! *Thanks!! *Which brand and
model do you have?

This one:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/gdguari...8958/lightbox/

It's a Stanley #78, inherited from my Dad, who's still around but not
using such things anymore. You can use the right arrow key to see some
more views.

The iron-on maple banding veneer
was much easier. *Finished with blondest shellac as a seal coat, plus
a couple more coats. *Then shellac- alkyd(?)poly mix, and finally
poly- pastewax mix with a touch of shellac. *The latter a couple of
coats. *Then rubbing, and the finish is looking like it will last.

I have to say, that looks like an argument for prefinished ply, at
least for a busy guy with limited skills. I count six or seven steps,
something I might try on a smaller project, but not on this one.

Well, I do take my (retired) time, that is true, but shellac dries in
minutes, so several caots go on really fast. *The other coats don't take
that much time either. *So for me a little more time is fine, versus the
(likely) expense of prefinished ply. *Although, maple ply of good quaity
isn't exactly cheap.

What do you do between coats?

On Sep 13, 9:13*pm, Amy Guarino wrote:
On Sep 13, 5:59*pm, Puckdropper puckdropper(at)yahoo(dot)com wrote:



If size is still a concern, there's all kinds of "knock down" style
fasteners that will allow you to finish the project in the shop,
disassemble it and reassemble in the house.

There's something I hadn't thought of. Any pointers to a source?

Sorry for the name confusion, more than one person in our family uses
this computer

On Sep 13, 9:17*pm, Amy Guarino wrote:
On Sep 13, 5:24*pm, Han wrote:









Greg Guarino wrote :

On 9/13/2012 3:46 PM, Han wrote:
Greg Guarino wrote innews:k2qsit$o9n$1@dont-
email.me:

Snip

I made some cabinets for an entertainment center using maple plywood,
and some 1/4x1" maple strips as "banding". *It was a pain to get them
down to be even on both sides with the plywood.

I think I can be of some assistance here, which is rare given my
modest knowledge. I used a rabbet plane for a similar job. I set the
fence on the plane to the thickness of the edge piece, so I couldn't
accidentally cut into the face of the plywood. Then I set the depth
stop so that the plane would cut the edge piece exactly flush with the
surface of the ply. Someone with more developed skills might be able
to do this by "feel", but it worked nicely for me.

Great idea for a needed tool I don't yet have! *Thanks!! *Which brand and
model do you have?

This one:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/gdguari...8958/lightbox/

It's a Stanley #78, inherited from my Dad, who's still around but not
using such things anymore. You can use the right arrow key to see some
more views.

The iron-on maple banding veneer
was much easier. *Finished with blondest shellac as a seal coat, plus
a couple more coats. *Then shellac- alkyd(?)poly mix, and finally
poly- pastewax mix with a touch of shellac. *The latter a couple of
coats. *Then rubbing, and the finish is looking like it will last.

I have to say, that looks like an argument for prefinished ply, at
least for a busy guy with limited skills. I count six or seven steps,
something I might try on a smaller project, but not on this one.

Well, I do take my (retired) time, that is true, but shellac dries in
minutes, so several caots go on really fast. *The other coats don't take
that much time either. *So for me a little more time is fine, versus the
(likely) expense of prefinished ply. *Although, maple ply of good quaity
isn't exactly cheap.

What do you do between coats?

Sorry for the name confusion, more than one person in our family uses
this computer

Amy Guarino wrote in news:c308df73-e579-4d12-
:

On Sep 13, 5:59*pm, Puckdropper puckdropper(at)yahoo(dot)com wrote:


If size is still a concern, there's all kinds of "knock down" style
fasteners that will allow you to finish the project in the shop,
disassemble it and reassemble in the house.

There's something I hadn't thought of. Any pointers to a source?

I've only seen them in catalogs (and other flat-pack furniture), but it's
worth checking Lee Valley.

Puckdropper
--
Make it to fit, don't make it fit.

On Thu, 13 Sep 2012 18:13:22 -0700 (PDT), Amy Guarino
If size is still a concern, there's all kinds of "knock down" style
fasteners that will allow you to finish the project in the shop,
disassemble it and reassemble in the house.

There's something I hadn't thought of. Any pointers to a source?

Do an item search for "knock".
http://www.leevalley.com/en/hardware....aspx?action=n

Amy Guarino wrote in
:

On Sep 13, 5:24*pm, Han wrote:
Greg Guarino wrote

e:









On 9/13/2012 3:46 PM, Han wrote:
Greg Guarino wrote innews:k2qsit$o9n$1@dont-
email.me:

Snip

I made some cabinets for an entertainment center using maple
plywood, and some 1/4x1" maple strips as "banding". *It was a pain
to get the
m
down to be even on both sides with the plywood.

I think I can be of some assistance here, which is rare given my
modest knowledge. I used a rabbet plane for a similar job. I set
the fence on the plane to the thickness of the edge piece, so I
couldn't accidentally cut into the face of the plywood. Then I set
the depth stop so that the plane would cut the edge piece exactly
flush with the surface of the ply. Someone with more developed
skills might be able to do this by "feel", but it worked nicely for
me.

Great idea for a needed tool I don't yet have! *Thanks!! *Which brand
and
model do you have?

This one:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/gdguari...8958/lightbox/

It's a Stanley #78, inherited from my Dad, who's still around but not
using such things anymore. You can use the right arrow key to see some
more views.

Looks BEAUTIFUL!! And the other pics are great as well, at least the
ones I looked at!

The iron-on maple banding veneer
was much easier. *Finished with blondest shellac as a seal coat,
plus
a couple more coats. *Then shellac- alkyd(?)poly mix, and finally
poly- pastewax mix with a touch of shellac. *The latter a couple
of coats. *Then rubbing, and the finish is looking like it will
last.

I have to say, that looks like an argument for prefinished ply, at
least for a busy guy with limited skills. I count six or seven
steps, something I might try on a smaller project, but not on this
one.

Well, I do take my (retired) time, that is true, but shellac dries in
minutes, so several caots go on really fast. *The other coats don't
take that much time either. *So for me a little more time is fine,
versus the (likely) expense of prefinished ply. *Although, maple ply
of good quality isn't exactly cheap.

What do you do between coats?

FB, other computer stuff, just being retired.

As far as what I do between coats on the wood, with the coats of shellac,
nothing. Light sanding later on, and with the pastewax final coats,
apply with #0000 steel wool, or similar non-steel, drying for a half-1
hour, then buffing with a car buffer (something Sears sold me decades
ago).

--
Best regards
Han
email address is invalid

Greg Guarino wrote:
On 9/13/2012 7:47 AM, dadiOH wrote:
One can mitigate the chipping by joining with tongues into dados;
IOW, hide it. I use 1/2" wide tongues with 1/8" shoulders into 3/8"
deep dados or rabbets.

My Dad used to make shelf units with what I'll call "full" dadoes,
meaning that if the shelf was 3/4" thick, the dado would be 3/4" also.
Could you explain, for the uninitiated, the advantage of making a
thinner "tongue"? Does it leave the uprights stronger? Or is it
cosmetic in some way?

1. Double shoulders let you know absolutely when the tongue is completely
within the dado and helps assure that the part is perpendicular to its mate.
A tongue with a single shoulder can work in a similar way but doesn't assure
the perpendicular part.

2. Double shoulders and a thinner tongue can give you a bit of a fudge
factor if the tongue is slightly undersize. If the dado is the same width,
any mismatch is glaringly obvious. If a thin tongue is a bit undersize the
shoulders hide that unfortunate fact.


--

dadiOH
____________________________

Winters getting colder? Tired of the rat race?
Maybe just ready for a change? Check it out...
http://www.floridaloghouse.net

Greg Guarino wrote:
On 9/13/2012 11:40 AM, WW wrote:


"Greg Guarino" wrote in message ...

I've got a notion to build a couple of wardrobes for our bedroom. As
an idea, it has scarcely reached the "half-assed" stage. There's no
set design yet. They would be roughly 32W x 24D x 84H. As there's no
way to carry objects that size through the house, I would need to
make two boxes for each unit, to be stacked on top of each other on
site. That would probably necessitate installing the face frame on
site as well. Greg.. This brings back memories. Building kitchen cabinets
for our
new house. Same dimensions as your cabinet. Ceiling height was 84
inches. Got it into the kitchen OK. Went to stand it up. No go.
Forgot the top to bottom diagonal was more than 84 inches. Cut
height down and made a toe kick section to slide under. Lesson
learned. this was in 1970. I still have a lot to learn and this site
is great learning from the experts. WW

I'm probably better at geometry than I am at woodworking. My ceiling
is 8'. I figure to make the wardrobes well short of that.

Don't neglect attaching them to the wall or doing something else to prevent
their tipping.

--

dadiOH
____________________________

Winters getting colder? Tired of the rat race?
Maybe just ready for a change? Check it out...
http://www.floridaloghouse.net

Han wrote:
Greg Guarino wrote in
:

On 9/13/2012 3:46 PM, Han wrote:
Greg Guarino wrote in news:k2qsit$o9n$1@dont-
email.me:

Snip

I made some cabinets for an entertainment center using maple
plywood, and some 1/4x1" maple strips as "banding". It was a pain
to get them down to be even on both sides with the plywood.

I think I can be of some assistance here, which is rare given my
modest knowledge. I used a rabbet plane for a similar job. I set the
fence on the plane to the thickness of the edge piece, so I couldn't
accidentally cut into the face of the plywood. Then I set the depth
stop so that the plane would cut the edge piece exactly flush with
the surface of the ply. Someone with more developed skills might be
able to do this by "feel", but it worked nicely for me.

Great idea for a needed tool I don't yet have! Thanks!! Which brand
and model do you have?

Got a router? You can do the same thing with it.

--

dadiOH
____________________________

Winters getting colder? Tired of the rat race?
Maybe just ready for a change? Check it out...
http://www.floridaloghouse.net

On 9/14/2012 8:23 AM, dadiOH wrote:
Greg Guarino wrote:
On 9/13/2012 7:47 AM, dadiOH wrote:
One can mitigate the chipping by joining with tongues into dados;
IOW, hide it. I use 1/2" wide tongues with 1/8" shoulders into 3/8"
deep dados or rabbets.

My Dad used to make shelf units with what I'll call "full" dadoes,
meaning that if the shelf was 3/4" thick, the dado would be 3/4" also.
Could you explain, for the uninitiated, the advantage of making a
thinner "tongue"? Does it leave the uprights stronger? Or is it
cosmetic in some way?

1. Double shoulders let you know absolutely when the tongue is completely
within the dado and helps assure that the part is perpendicular to its mate.
A tongue with a single shoulder can work in a similar way but doesn't assure
the perpendicular part.

2. Double shoulders and a thinner tongue can give you a bit of a fudge
factor if the tongue is slightly undersize. If the dado is the same width,
any mismatch is glaringly obvious. If a thin tongue is a bit undersize the
shoulders hide that unfortunate fact.


Excellent explanation. Thanks.

On 9/14/2012 8:30 AM, dadiOH wrote:
Han wrote:
Greg Guarino wrote in
:

On 9/13/2012 3:46 PM, Han wrote:
Greg Guarino wrote in news:k2qsit$o9n$1@dont-
email.me:

Snip

I made some cabinets for an entertainment center using maple
plywood, and some 1/4x1" maple strips as "banding". It was a pain
to get them down to be even on both sides with the plywood.

I think I can be of some assistance here, which is rare given my
modest knowledge. I used a rabbet plane for a similar job. I set the
fence on the plane to the thickness of the edge piece, so I couldn't
accidentally cut into the face of the plywood. Then I set the depth
stop so that the plane would cut the edge piece exactly flush with
the surface of the ply. Someone with more developed skills might be
able to do this by "feel", but it worked nicely for me.

Great idea for a needed tool I don't yet have! Thanks!! Which brand
and model do you have?

Got a router? You can do the same thing with it.

I considered using a router for that task. In my case, I was trimming a
1x2 oak edge that I had glued around the perimeter of a desktop (with
the 1.5" dimension vertical). I thus had a 3/4" thick surface to take
down a very small amount, and only in certain areas. I think I may even
have asked for advice here.

My fear was that I'd have trouble keeping the router square with only a
1.5" surface for the plate to ride on. Someone with more skill and
confidence might not have that problem. That notwithstanding, the plane
did a nice job and I wouldn't hesitate to do it that way again.

On 9/14/2012 8:32 AM, Greg Guarino wrote:

My fear was that I'd have trouble keeping the router square with only a
1.5" surface for the plate to ride on. Someone with more skill and
confidence might not have that problem. That notwithstanding, the plane
did a nice job and I wouldn't hesitate to do it that way again.

That's where a laminate trimmer comes in handy, like the Bosch Colt.

My problem with using a plane on plywood banding is the sheer thinness
of veneer in today's plywood. Even with my sharp, low angle, Veritas
block plane, I've knicked about as much veneer as I've gouged with a
router down through the years ... sometimes the grain just works against
you.

That said, I trimmed all the banding on these parts yesterday with a top
bearing, flush trim, bit in the router table, with a split fence and
featherboard:

https://picasaweb.google.com/1113554...30727675753 8

https://picasaweb.google.com/1113554...49653985780754

Much less chance of a screw-up when you're on a deadline, out of
material, and with no spare parts that would take hours to re-cut if you
slipped. ... and that is ALWAYS when it happens.

--
www.eWoodShop.com
Last update: 4/15/2010
KarlCaillouet@ (the obvious)
http://gplus.to/eWoodShop

On 9/14/2012 8:20 AM, Greg Guarino wrote:

Excellent explanation. Thanks.

3. More surface area for glue ... every little bit helps.

--
www.eWoodShop.com
Last update: 4/15/2010
KarlCaillouet@ (the obvious)
http://gplus.to/eWoodShop

On 9/13/2012 8:13 PM, Amy Guarino wrote:
On Sep 13, 5:59 pm, Puckdropper puckdropper(at)yahoo(dot)com wrote:


If size is still a concern, there's all kinds of "knock down" style
fasteners that will allow you to finish the project in the shop,
disassemble it and reassemble in the house.

There's something I hadn't thought of. Any pointers to a source?

These are, above and beyond the pale, the coolest thing going these days
.... if you can find/afford them:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NaN-Emvizq8

http://swissinvis.com/

The latter will give you North America contact info.

--
www.eWoodShop.com
Last update: 4/15/2010
KarlCaillouet@ (the obvious)
http://gplus.to/eWoodShop

On 9/14/2012 7:25 AM, dadiOH wrote:
Don't neglect attaching them to the wall or doing something else to prevent
their tipping.

+1

I passed on a stand-alone cabinet job last year because the prospective
client poo-poohed the idea of anti-tip measures ... she had one small
boy, and another in the oven. I can't afford to risk what's taken years
to build defending a liability suit, insurance or no.

--
www.eWoodShop.com
Last update: 4/15/2010
KarlCaillouet@ (the obvious)
http://gplus.to/eWoodShop

Swingman wrote:
On 9/14/2012 8:32 AM, Greg Guarino wrote:

My fear was that I'd have trouble keeping the router square with
only a 1.5" surface for the plate to ride on. Someone with more skill and
confidence might not have that problem. That notwithstanding, the
plane did a nice job and I wouldn't hesitate to do it that way again.

That's where a laminate trimmer comes in handy, like the Bosch Colt.

My problem with using a plane on plywood banding is the sheer thinness
of veneer in today's plywood. Even with my sharp, low angle, Veritas
block plane, I've knicked about as much veneer as I've gouged with a
router down through the years ... sometimes the grain just works
against you.

I often use an itsy-bitsy Stanley...don't recall the number but it is about
1/2 the size of a block plane, fits easily in one hand and lets me use my
palm and finger tips to guide/control it.

With either it or a block plane I point it about 60 degrees to what I want
to cut and then sort of slide the blade along the high edge. Much easier to
avoid nicking the veneer.

--

dadiOH
____________________________

Winters getting colder? Tired of the rat race?
Maybe just ready for a change? Check it out...
http://www.floridaloghouse.net

Swingman writes:
On 9/14/2012 8:32 AM, Greg Guarino wrote:

My fear was that I'd have trouble keeping the router square with only a
1.5" surface for the plate to ride on. Someone with more skill and
confidence might not have that problem. That notwithstanding, the plane
did a nice job and I wouldn't hesitate to do it that way again.

That's where a laminate trimmer comes in handy, like the Bosch Colt.

My problem with using a plane on plywood banding is the sheer thinness
of veneer in today's plywood. Even with my sharp, low angle, Veritas
block plane, I've knicked about as much veneer as I've gouged with a
router down through the years ... sometimes the grain just works against
you.

I usually use a smooth or block plane to knock the banding down to
a RCH of the plywood, then use a card scraper to finish up. The
probability of tear-out on the ply is much less.

scott