On 2/26/2013 1:21 PM, Swingman wrote:

Just so happens I'm working on a chair reproduction as we speak where
the side aprons are 13/16" thick ... the error from using the wrong face
when installing the aprons is exactly 1/32" ... enough to cause a gap
and reveal error on either the front or back leg.

Case in point:

Today, in order to get this:

https://picasaweb.google.com/1113554...13230 7708194

https://picasaweb.google.com/1113554...54940 2609826

I had to measure, with the same precision as the drawing (1/32") thusly:

https://picasaweb.google.com/1113554...87012 3088434

https://picasaweb.google.com/1113554...20626 5997442

(I use an Incra Rule and .05 Incra pencil lead when laying out to
facilitate this)

What it boils down to ... when you work from a precision drawing
(Sketchup's precision, IIRC, is the same as AutoCad: 0.000001), you do
yourself a big favor by trusting your model and using the actual
dimensions of the drawing to the best of your ability.

This will guarantee you that, if you take care in measurements and use
the same resolution, you can accurately fabricate that model in real
life, no matter how many you have to scale to fit a space.

This may not seem like much, but put 12 cabinets side by side and expect
everything to line up with precision and work out without a hitch, _in a
space that did not even exist when you built the cabinets_ , you gotta
learn to trust your tools.

Even more important when you work with someone else and they use the
same methods and sense of meticulous precision, but work in another
location.

Example: Leon built this cabinet, on less than 24 hours notice, in his
shop, and from a drawing, and it fit in between two already installed
components _precisely_ the next morning, I do mean precisely:

https://picasaweb.google.com/1113554...5270069 82290

From this:

https://picasaweb.google.com/1113554...77120382568930

(and yes, we calibrated/checked our table saw fence rulers about six
years ago)

And, I'm still impressed that by that feat ...

--
eWoodShop: www.eWoodShop.com
Wood Shop: www.e-WoodShop.net
https://plus.google.com/114902129577517371552/posts
http://www.custommade.com/by/ewoodshop/
KarlCaillouet@ (the obvious)

Swingman wrote in
:

On 2/26/2013 1:21 PM, Swingman wrote:

Just so happens I'm working on a chair reproduction as we speak where
the side aprons are 13/16" thick ... the error from using the wrong
face when installing the aprons is exactly 1/32" ... enough to cause
a gap and reveal error on either the front or back leg.

Case in point:

Today, in order to get this:

https://picasaweb.google.com/1113554...hopMissionChai
rReproduction2013#5849359132307708194

https://picasaweb.google.com/1113554...hopMissionChai
rReproduction2013#5849360549402609826

I had to measure, with the same precision as the drawing (1/32")
thusly:

https://picasaweb.google.com/1113554...hopMissionChai
rReproduction2013#5849367870123088434

https://picasaweb.google.com/1113554...hopMissionChai
rReproduction2013#5849363206265997442

(I use an Incra Rule and .05 Incra pencil lead when laying out to
facilitate this)

What it boils down to ... when you work from a precision drawing
(Sketchup's precision, IIRC, is the same as AutoCad: 0.000001), you do
yourself a big favor by trusting your model and using the actual
dimensions of the drawing to the best of your ability.

This will guarantee you that, if you take care in measurements and use
the same resolution, you can accurately fabricate that model in real
life, no matter how many you have to scale to fit a space.

This may not seem like much, but put 12 cabinets side by side and
expect everything to line up with precision and work out without a
hitch, _in a space that did not even exist when you built the
cabinets_ , you gotta learn to trust your tools.

Even more important when you work with someone else and they use the
same methods and sense of meticulous precision, but work in another
location.

Example: Leon built this cabinet, on less than 24 hours notice, in his
shop, and from a drawing, and it fit in between two already installed
components _precisely_ the next morning, I do mean precisely:

https://picasaweb.google.com/1113554...hopEuropeanSty
leKitchen201102#5679345527006982290

From this:

https://picasaweb.google.com/1113554...hopJustStuff#5
849377120382568930

(and yes, we calibrated/checked our table saw fence rulers about six
years ago)

And, I'm still impressed that by that feat ...

Wow ...

--
Best regards
Han
email address is invalid

On 2/26/2013 3:35 PM, Swingman wrote:
Even more important when you work with someone else and they use the
same methods and sense of meticulous precision

Even more important when you work with someone else and they use the
same methods and sense of meticulous precision


Damn, I going to have to copy paste this in my note app on my phone so
that I can sound more better when explaining things. ;~)

A neighbor stopped by and was wondering how all this, computer to
workshop, stuff worked, I summed up your phrase above by simply saying
that it helps to be "AR".

Thinking back to this morning when setting up a dado to within .005" of
being 1/2" wide after adjusting the first trial cut. That is a precision
that is approaching 5/1016".
FWIW that is hard to see on the ruler. ;~) Thank goodness for
electronic calipers.

In article om,
Lew Hodgett wrote:

Lew Hodgett wrote:

Actually it is 540 mm.
----------------------------------------
"Bill" wrote:

No fair using your slide rule!
------------------------------------------
Lew Hodgett wrote:

Still good to 3 decimel place accuracy.

"Leon" wrote:

If you enter the correct data.
-----------------------------------------------
21-3/32" = 21.09375"

1" = 25.6 mm

21.09375" x 25.6 mm/" = 540 mm.

Nuf said.

Lew

Here on the East coast there are still 25.4 millimeters per inch. When did
they change it in California?



--
There is always an easy solution to every human problem -- neat,
plausible, and wrong." (H L Mencken)

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

(Edward A. Falk) wrote in
:

In article ,
Larry W wrote:

Here on the East coast there are still 25.4 millimeters per inch. When
did they change it in California?

After the Loma Prieta quake. They didn't want to re-survey the
440 Freeway, so they came up with this compromise.


Well, the meter was originally based on some measurement between the North
pole and equator at some specific time. It's entirely possible that using
that old method it could have grown. Hasn't been that way for over a
century, but maybe Lew still remembers when it was. *g*

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

In article ,
Edward A. Falk wrote:
In article ,
Larry W wrote:

Here on the East coast there are still 25.4 millimeters per inch. When did
they change it in California?

After the Loma Prieta quake. They didn't want to re-survey the
440 Freeway, so they came up with this compromise.


A few good things that originated in California have worked their way
across the country over the years. "Right turn on red after stopping" comes
to mind. I hope this change to 25.6mm/inch does not make it!


--
There is always an easy solution to every human problem -- neat,
plausible, and wrong." (H L Mencken)

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

On Tue, 26 Feb 2013 15:35:24 -0600, Swingman wrote:

On 2/26/2013 1:21 PM, Swingman wrote:

Just so happens I'm working on a chair reproduction as we speak where
the side aprons are 13/16" thick ... the error from using the wrong face
when installing the aprons is exactly 1/32" ... enough to cause a gap
and reveal error on either the front or back leg.

Case in point:

Today, in order to get this:

https://picasaweb.google.com/1113554...13230 7708194

https://picasaweb.google.com/1113554...54940 2609826

I had to measure, with the same precision as the drawing (1/32") thusly:

https://picasaweb.google.com/1113554...87012 3088434

https://picasaweb.google.com/1113554...20626 5997442

(I use an Incra Rule and .05 Incra pencil lead when laying out to
facilitate this)

What it boils down to ... when you work from a precision drawing
(Sketchup's precision, IIRC, is the same as AutoCad: 0.000001), you do
yourself a big favor by trusting your model and using the actual
dimensions of the drawing to the best of your ability.

This will guarantee you that, if you take care in measurements and use
the same resolution, you can accurately fabricate that model in real
life, no matter how many you have to scale to fit a space.

This may not seem like much, but put 12 cabinets side by side and expect
everything to line up with precision and work out without a hitch, _in a
space that did not even exist when you built the cabinets_ , you gotta
learn to trust your tools.

Even more important when you work with someone else and they use the
same methods and sense of meticulous precision, but work in another
location.

Example: Leon built this cabinet, on less than 24 hours notice, in his
shop, and from a drawing, and it fit in between two already installed
components _precisely_ the next morning, I do mean precisely:

https://picasaweb.google.com/1113554...5270069 82290

From this:

https://picasaweb.google.com/1113554...77120382568930

(and yes, we calibrated/checked our table saw fence rulers about six
years ago)

And, I'm still impressed that by that feat ...

Nice work, I don't understand why people argue about trying for as
much accuracy as you can get. My experience has been that the more
attention to the detail saves a lot of problems in finishing a
project. You have a system that works well for you. I can't claim to
always work to that accuracy but I applaud you for holding yourself to
your standard.

Mike M

"Lew Hodgett" wrote:

Are you using 1" = 25.6 mm?

Lew
-------------------------------------
"Puckdropper" wrote:

I hope not. 1" = 25.4 mm.

Puckdropper
-----------------------------------------
Is the mind the first or the second thing to go?

Lew

Lew Hodgett wrote:
"Lew Hodgett" wrote:

Are you using 1" = 25.6 mm?

Lew
-------------------------------------
"Puckdropper" wrote:

I hope not. 1" = 25.4 mm.

Puckdropper
-----------------------------------------
Is the mind the first or the second thing to go?


Only your ureologist knows for sure...

--

-Mike-

On 2/27/2013 5:54 PM, Mike M wrote:
...I don't understand why people argue about trying for as
much accuracy as you can get. My experience has been that the more
attention to the detail saves a lot of problems in finishing a
project. You have a system that works well for you. I can't claim to
always work to that accuracy but I applaud you for holding yourself to
your standard.

I do it simply because my work requires it.

Here's an absolute perfect example of how easy it is to be bit in the
butt by 1/16" if you don't:

https://picasaweb.google.com/1113554...91840854584354

Rotating, a part 1/16" over 2 3/8" (instead of making a small, 1.4
degree, compound angle, cut in the apron) causes an almost 3/4" error in
leg offset ... totally unacceptable, and grievous, for both intended
use, and implementation of design.

Imagine, what it would do to your reputation and bottom line, to give a
client, who paid you good money for a faithful reproduction, the chair
on the right, and then have her put it next to an existing chair in her
dining room and expect them to visually line up for her next dinner party.

The tendency to ignore precise measuring, and angle inconsistencies, no
matter how convenient to do so, is a fools game that will very often
result in unintended consequences costing time, money and materials.

(Also points out the wisdom of making a detailed, scale model of your
project before you ever go out to the shop so these types of issues can
be sussed out on paper, instead of on materials ... IOW, enter the
obligatory Sketchup tout, once again G)

And no ... I did not make this mistake, although I did wonder just what
the consequences/impact of eight fewer compound angle mortise and
floating tenon joints would have on the project ... thanks to Sketchup,
that was easier to determine than would otherwise been possible ... just
thought I'd share it.)

Measure twice, carefully and with precision ... then repeat as often as
necessary.

--
eWoodShop: www.eWoodShop.com
Wood Shop: www.e-WoodShop.net
https://plus.google.com/114902129577517371552/posts
http://www.custommade.com/by/ewoodshop/
KarlCaillouet@ (the obvious)

On Thu, 07 Mar 2013 07:59:45 -0600, Swingman wrote:

On 2/27/2013 5:54 PM, Mike M wrote:
...I don't understand why people argue about trying for as
much accuracy as you can get. My experience has been that the more
attention to the detail saves a lot of problems in finishing a
project. You have a system that works well for you. I can't claim to
always work to that accuracy but I applaud you for holding yourself to
your standard.

I do it simply because my work requires it.

Here's an absolute perfect example of how easy it is to be bit in the
butt by 1/16" if you don't:

https://picasaweb.google.com/1113554...91840854584354

Rotating, a part 1/16" over 2 3/8" (instead of making a small, 1.4
degree, compound angle, cut in the apron) causes an almost 3/4" error in
leg offset ... totally unacceptable, and grievous, for both intended
use, and implementation of design.

Imagine, what it would do to your reputation and bottom line, to give a
client, who paid you good money for a faithful reproduction, the chair
on the right, and then have her put it next to an existing chair in her
dining room and expect them to visually line up for her next dinner party.

The tendency to ignore precise measuring, and angle inconsistencies, no
matter how convenient to do so, is a fools game that will very often
result in unintended consequences costing time, money and materials.

(Also points out the wisdom of making a detailed, scale model of your
project before you ever go out to the shop so these types of issues can
be sussed out on paper, instead of on materials ... IOW, enter the
obligatory Sketchup tout, once again G)

And no ... I did not make this mistake, although I did wonder just what
the consequences/impact of eight fewer compound angle mortise and
floating tenon joints would have on the project ... thanks to Sketchup,
that was easier to determine than would otherwise been possible ... just
thought I'd share it.)

Measure twice, carefully and with precision ... then repeat as often as
necessary.

I had to look at that drawing a bit to grasp how much that 1/16"
caused the measurement to change. The sketch up is definitely
something I'm slowly learning.

On 3/7/2013 7:59 AM, Swingman wrote:
On 2/27/2013 5:54 PM, Mike M wrote:
...I don't understand why people argue about trying for as
much accuracy as you can get. My experience has been that the more
attention to the detail saves a lot of problems in finishing a
project. You have a system that works well for you. I can't claim to
always work to that accuracy but I applaud you for holding yourself to
your standard.

I do it simply because my work requires it.

Here's an absolute perfect example of how easy it is to be bit in the
butt by 1/16" if you don't:

https://picasaweb.google.com/1113554...91840854584354


Rotating, a part 1/16" over 2 3/8" (instead of making a small, 1.4
degree, compound angle, cut in the apron) causes an almost 3/4" error in
leg offset ... totally unacceptable, and grievous, for both intended
use, and implementation of design.

Imagine, what it would do to your reputation and bottom line, to give a
client, who paid you good money for a faithful reproduction, the chair
on the right, and then have her put it next to an existing chair in her
dining room and expect them to visually line up for her next dinner party.

The tendency to ignore precise measuring, and angle inconsistencies, no
matter how convenient to do so, is a fools game that will very often
result in unintended consequences costing time, money and materials.

(Also points out the wisdom of making a detailed, scale model of your
project before you ever go out to the shop so these types of issues can
be sussed out on paper, instead of on materials ... IOW, enter the
obligatory Sketchup tout, once again G)

And no ... I did not make this mistake, although I did wonder just what
the consequences/impact of eight fewer compound angle mortise and
floating tenon joints would have on the project ... thanks to Sketchup,
that was easier to determine than would otherwise been possible ... just
thought I'd share it.)

Measure twice, carefully and with precision ... then repeat as often as
necessary.


And to further support accuracy beyond 1/32", the below link goes to
my desk top which I glued up today. Length 93.5" Height 54" Depth
14.5". 8 dado's in the plywood panels and 12 dado/groves in the front
and back face frames, no butt joints.

Back and front face frames are not identical, back rails are different
length as are the center stiles from the front rails. Back center
stiles are also wider than the front center stiles.

Nothing was cut to fit, all was cut exactly to reflect the plans. Had
any cuts been off this would non have locked together as it did. Whew!

http://www.flickr.com/photos/lcb1121...9515/lightbox/

On 3/7/2013 2:16 PM, Leon wrote:

And to further support accuracy beyond 1/32", the below link goes to my
desk top which I glued up today. Length 93.5" Height 54" Depth 14.5".
8 dado's in the plywood panels and 12 dado/groves in the front and back
face frames, no butt joints.

Back and front face frames are not identical, back rails are different
length as are the center stiles from the front rails. Back center
stiles are also wider than the front center stiles.

Nothing was cut to fit, all was cut exactly to reflect the plans. Had
any cuts been off this would non have locked together as it did. Whew!

http://www.flickr.com/photos/lcb1121...9515/lightbox/

Damn ... and I was looking forward to coming over and helping you pound
on it to fit!!

Looking good!

Had my own "Whew" just a minute ago ... all frame mortises & tenons cut,
aprons and rails done, and dry fit:

https://picasaweb.google.com/1113554...85181 0598658

Routing mortises accurately in curved parts is pucker time, indeed.

I still have the curved back rests slats left ... onward.

--
eWoodShop: www.eWoodShop.com
Wood Shop: www.e-WoodShop.net
https://plus.google.com/114902129577517371552/posts
http://www.custommade.com/by/ewoodshop/
KarlCaillouet@ (the obvious)

On Thu, 07 Mar 2013 14:16:27 -0600, Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet
wrote:

On 3/7/2013 7:59 AM, Swingman wrote:
On 2/27/2013 5:54 PM, Mike M wrote:
...I don't understand why people argue about trying for as
much accuracy as you can get. My experience has been that the more
attention to the detail saves a lot of problems in finishing a
project. You have a system that works well for you. I can't claim to
always work to that accuracy but I applaud you for holding yourself to
your standard.

I do it simply because my work requires it.

Here's an absolute perfect example of how easy it is to be bit in the
butt by 1/16" if you don't:

https://picasaweb.google.com/1113554...91840854584354


Rotating, a part 1/16" over 2 3/8" (instead of making a small, 1.4
degree, compound angle, cut in the apron) causes an almost 3/4" error in
leg offset ... totally unacceptable, and grievous, for both intended
use, and implementation of design.

Imagine, what it would do to your reputation and bottom line, to give a
client, who paid you good money for a faithful reproduction, the chair
on the right, and then have her put it next to an existing chair in her
dining room and expect them to visually line up for her next dinner party.

The tendency to ignore precise measuring, and angle inconsistencies, no
matter how convenient to do so, is a fools game that will very often
result in unintended consequences costing time, money and materials.

(Also points out the wisdom of making a detailed, scale model of your
project before you ever go out to the shop so these types of issues can
be sussed out on paper, instead of on materials ... IOW, enter the
obligatory Sketchup tout, once again G)

And no ... I did not make this mistake, although I did wonder just what
the consequences/impact of eight fewer compound angle mortise and
floating tenon joints would have on the project ... thanks to Sketchup,
that was easier to determine than would otherwise been possible ... just
thought I'd share it.)

Measure twice, carefully and with precision ... then repeat as often as
necessary.


And to further support accuracy beyond 1/32", the below link goes to
my desk top which I glued up today. Length 93.5" Height 54" Depth
14.5". 8 dado's in the plywood panels and 12 dado/groves in the front
and back face frames, no butt joints.

Back and front face frames are not identical, back rails are different
length as are the center stiles from the front rails. Back center
stiles are also wider than the front center stiles.

Nothing was cut to fit, all was cut exactly to reflect the plans. Had
any cuts been off this would non have locked together as it did. Whew!

http://www.flickr.com/photos/lcb1121...9515/lightbox/





I do agree with you, just haven't achieved the ability to perfectly
execute all of it yet. Did invest in the drill press table and fence
from Woodpecker so looking forward to trying that. I do agree with
the idea of using sketchup and batch cutting. I'm also quilty of
having way to many things going on. Anyway your project is coming
along great and looks great as well. If I didn't have to take these
pain pills it would probably help my accuracy too.

Swingman wrote in
:

On 3/7/2013 2:16 PM, Leon wrote:

And to further support accuracy beyond 1/32", the below link goes to
my desk top which I glued up today. Length 93.5" Height 54" Depth
14.5". 8 dado's in the plywood panels and 12 dado/groves in the front
and back face frames, no butt joints.

Back and front face frames are not identical, back rails are
different length as are the center stiles from the front rails. Back
center stiles are also wider than the front center stiles.

Nothing was cut to fit, all was cut exactly to reflect the plans.
Had any cuts been off this would non have locked together as it did.
Whew!

http://www.flickr.com/photos/lcb1121...9515/lightbox/

Damn ... and I was looking forward to coming over and helping you
pound on it to fit!!

Looking good!

Had my own "Whew" just a minute ago ... all frame mortises & tenons
cut, aprons and rails done, and dry fit:

https://picasaweb.google.com/1113554...hopMissionChai
rReproduction2013#5852694851810598658

Routing mortises accurately in curved parts is pucker time, indeed.

I still have the curved back rests slats left ... onward.

Wow ...

--
Best regards
Han
email address is invalid

Swingman wrote:
On 3/7/2013 2:16 PM, Leon wrote:

And to further support accuracy beyond 1/32", the below link goes to my
desk top which I glued up today. Length 93.5" Height 54" Depth 14.5".
8 dado's in the plywood panels and 12 dado/groves in the front and back
face frames, no butt joints.

Back and front face frames are not identical, back rails are different
length as are the center stiles from the front rails. Back center
stiles are also wider than the front center stiles.

Nothing was cut to fit, all was cut exactly to reflect the plans. Had
any cuts been off this would non have locked together as it did. Whew!

http://www.flickr.com/photos/lcb1121...9515/lightbox/

Damn ... and I was looking forward to coming over and helping you pound on it to fit!!

Looking good!

Had my own "Whew" just a minute ago ... all frame mortises & tenons cut,
aprons and rails done, and dry fit:

https://picasaweb.google.com/1113554...85181 0598658

Routing mortises accurately in curved parts is pucker time, indeed.

No kidding but looking really good!


I still have the curved back rests slats left ... onward.
O'boy,

On 3/7/2013 1:25 PM, Mike M wrote:

I had to look at that drawing a bit to grasp how much that 1/16"
caused the measurement to change. The sketch up is definitely
something I'm slowly learning.

Being an ex-artilleryman I'm not a stranger to angular deviation, but
I was struck by the magnitude of this particular situation myself.

--
eWoodShop: www.eWoodShop.com
Wood Shop: www.e-WoodShop.net
https://plus.google.com/114902129577517371552/posts
http://www.custommade.com/by/ewoodshop/
KarlCaillouet@ (the obvious)

Swingman wrote:
On 3/7/2013 1:25 PM, Mike M wrote:

I had to look at that drawing a bit to grasp how much that 1/16"
caused the measurement to change. The sketch up is definitely
something I'm slowly learning.

Being an ex-artilleryman I'm not a stranger to angular deviation, but
I was struck by the magnitude of this particular situation myself.

Likewise (although not with the artillery background), I am familar with the
fact that the deviations will result in greater deviations over distance,
but I too was surprised at what such a seeminly small tweak resulted in with
your chair.

--

-Mike-

On 3/8/2013 8:39 AM, Mike Marlow wrote:
Swingman wrote:
On 3/7/2013 1:25 PM, Mike M wrote:

I had to look at that drawing a bit to grasp how much that 1/16"
caused the measurement to change. The sketch up is definitely
something I'm slowly learning.

Being an ex-artilleryman I'm not a stranger to angular deviation, but
I was struck by the magnitude of this particular situation myself.

Likewise (although not with the artillery background), I am familar with the
fact that the deviations will result in greater deviations over distance,
but I too was surprised at what such a seeminly small tweak resulted in with
your chair.

It makes sense when you think about it. Visualize this:

Rotate a vertical line, 40 1/4" high (which is roughly the height of the
center point of the curved chair leg), 1.4 degrees around a point 16
13/16" (the height of the top of a side apron) from the bottom of the line.

That rotation moves the top and bottom points of the line just shy of 1"
away from each other on the vertical plane (13/32" on the bottom, and
19/32" on the top +/-).

Being aware of that is what got me to checking ... (I was really looking
for a way around routing mortises on the edge a compound angled apron).

Although the Multi-Router makes that operation a piece of cake, the fact
of mirror images and references edges with grain direction being
involved, made mistakes inevitable ... and this job has a razor thin
margin for material costs.

Another option would have been to angle the face of the leg at the
mating point appropriately, but that causes just as many consequences
that needed to be guarded against.

Oh well, all's well that ends well ...

--
eWoodShop: www.eWoodShop.com
Wood Shop: www.e-WoodShop.net
https://plus.google.com/114902129577517371552/posts
http://www.custommade.com/by/ewoodshop/
KarlCaillouet@ (the obvious)

Swingman wrote in
:

On 3/8/2013 8:39 AM, Mike Marlow wrote:
Swingman wrote:
On 3/7/2013 1:25 PM, Mike M wrote:

I had to look at that drawing a bit to grasp how much that 1/16"
caused the measurement to change. The sketch up is definitely
something I'm slowly learning.

Being an ex-artilleryman I'm not a stranger to angular deviation,
but I was struck by the magnitude of this particular situation
myself.

Likewise (although not with the artillery background), I am familar
with the fact that the deviations will result in greater deviations
over distance, but I too was surprised at what such a seeminly small
tweak resulted in with your chair.

It makes sense when you think about it. Visualize this:

Rotate a vertical line, 40 1/4" high (which is roughly the height of
the center point of the curved chair leg), 1.4 degrees around a point
16 13/16" (the height of the top of a side apron) from the bottom of
the line.

That rotation moves the top and bottom points of the line just shy of
1" away from each other on the vertical plane (13/32" on the bottom,
and 19/32" on the top +/-).

Being aware of that is what got me to checking ... (I was really
looking for a way around routing mortises on the edge a compound
angled apron).

Although the Multi-Router makes that operation a piece of cake, the
fact of mirror images and references edges with grain direction being
involved, made mistakes inevitable ... and this job has a razor thin
margin for material costs.

Another option would have been to angle the face of the leg at the
mating point appropriately, but that causes just as many consequences
that needed to be guarded against.

Oh well, all's well that ends well ...

Yes, that is also the way leverage works. I think you're making great
reproductions now (not like the watches on the streets of NY at all!!
smirk). I even understand the angling on the face of the leg ...

Great work, annd great explanations, as usual!!

--
Best regards
Han
email address is invalid