Still not beautiful, but it should be a lot easier to use now, and more
accurate as well.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/gdguar...1013/lightbox/

I first made it a couple of years ago when I was building some
bookcases. It worked pretty well, but with a couple of flaws.

Firstly, apparently plywood, even oak ply (made, not in China, but in
the Great White North) even from the *same* batch, will not be of
uniform thickness. The first iteration of the jig had the two halves
simply screwed in. Any "adjustments" meant finding new locations for the
screws. This was inconvenient, but got the job done.

Next, the "runners" were not completely straight. I thought they were,
but the dadoes were consistently a tiny bit more snug in the middle than
on the ends. This too was a small flaw, but it bugged me a little.

I had some spare time today, so I made two improvements. I made the jig
adjustable using knobs with threaded shafts that mate with threaded
inserts. I set it up so the width of the opening can be adjusted up to a
little over 1.5". It feels like the knobs hold the movable half of the
jig securely.

Next I trued up the runners. I don't have a jointer, so I used a router
with a straight bit and a framing square as a guide. Now both are nice
and straight.

---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com

On 2/16/15 1:47 PM, Greg Guarino wrote:
Still not beautiful, but it should be a lot easier to use now, and more
accurate as well.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/gdguar...1013/lightbox/


I first made it a couple of years ago when I was building some
bookcases. It worked pretty well, but with a couple of flaws.

Firstly, apparently plywood, even oak ply (made, not in China, but in
the Great White North) even from the *same* batch, will not be of
uniform thickness. The first iteration of the jig had the two halves
simply screwed in. Any "adjustments" meant finding new locations for the
screws. This was inconvenient, but got the job done.

Next, the "runners" were not completely straight. I thought they were,
but the dadoes were consistently a tiny bit more snug in the middle than
on the ends. This too was a small flaw, but it bugged me a little.

I had some spare time today, so I made two improvements. I made the jig
adjustable using knobs with threaded shafts that mate with threaded
inserts. I set it up so the width of the opening can be adjusted up to a
little over 1.5". It feels like the knobs hold the movable half of the
jig securely.

Next I trued up the runners. I don't have a jointer, so I used a router
with a straight bit and a framing square as a guide. Now both are nice
and straight.

---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus
protection is active.
http://www.avast.com


Sounds like some great improvements.
Here's my take on it...
http://picasaweb.google.com/109584249613776832016/DadoJig


--

-MIKE-

"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com

---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply

On Monday, February 16, 2015 at 5:34:49 PM UTC-5, -MIKE- wrote:
On 2/16/15 1:47 PM, Greg Guarino wrote:
Still not beautiful, but it should be a lot easier to use now, and more
accurate as well.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/gdguar...1013/lightbox/


I first made it a couple of years ago when I was building some
bookcases. It worked pretty well, but with a couple of flaws.

Firstly, apparently plywood, even oak ply (made, not in China, but in
the Great White North) even from the *same* batch, will not be of
uniform thickness. The first iteration of the jig had the two halves
simply screwed in. Any "adjustments" meant finding new locations for the
screws. This was inconvenient, but got the job done.

Next, the "runners" were not completely straight. I thought they were,
but the dadoes were consistently a tiny bit more snug in the middle than
on the ends. This too was a small flaw, but it bugged me a little.

I had some spare time today, so I made two improvements. I made the jig
adjustable using knobs with threaded shafts that mate with threaded
inserts. I set it up so the width of the opening can be adjusted up to a
little over 1.5". It feels like the knobs hold the movable half of the
jig securely.

Next I trued up the runners. I don't have a jointer, so I used a router
with a straight bit and a framing square as a guide. Now both are nice
and straight.

---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus
protection is active.
http://www.avast.com


Sounds like some great improvements.
Here's my take on it...
http://picasaweb.google.com/109584249613776832016/DadoJig


--

-MIKE-

"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com

---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply

Well, I have to say that yours is more finely done in pretty much every way.. But it confused me a little at first; I didn't get how the toggle clamps were supposed to work, especially the first set that were attached to one of the "halves". But now I see that you changed that, I assume sliding the jig along the work to each new location.

I remade mine more to try my hand at using knobs to make an adjustable jig. It turned out to be pretty easy. It looks like your knobs have a female thread that mates with a T-bolt. I used knobs with male shafts that mate with threaded inserts that thread into the wood. The connection seems solid, but I guess I'll learn if that's really true over time.

I haven't used the "new" jig yet, and don't in fact have a project planned using dado joints at the moment. But I have pictures from other projects, with earlier iterations of the jig. I use mine a little differently. I screw the jig into a sacrificial work surface. The jig stays stationary; I slide the workpiece under it and clamp it at each location to the work surface.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/gdguar...1493/lightbox/

Thanks for the link. It's given me some ideas about how I might make the next one better. (you know, someday, when I have more time)

In this case I had two pieces (temporarily) fastened side by side so I could do both together: saving time and ensuring that they'd have to line up. I realized while doing that that a longer jig (like yours) would have been a better idea.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/gdguar...4446/lightbox/

On 2/16/2015 1:47 PM, Greg Guarino wrote:
Still not beautiful, but it should be a lot easier to use now, and more
accurate as well.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/gdguar...1013/lightbox/


I first made it a couple of years ago when I was building some
bookcases. It worked pretty well, but with a couple of flaws.

Firstly, apparently plywood, even oak ply (made, not in China, but in
the Great White North) even from the *same* batch, will not be of
uniform thickness. The first iteration of the jig had the two halves
simply screwed in. Any "adjustments" meant finding new locations for the
screws. This was inconvenient, but got the job done.

Next, the "runners" were not completely straight. I thought they were,
but the dadoes were consistently a tiny bit more snug in the middle than
on the ends. This too was a small flaw, but it bugged me a little.

I had some spare time today, so I made two improvements. I made the jig
adjustable using knobs with threaded shafts that mate with threaded
inserts. I set it up so the width of the opening can be adjusted up to a
little over 1.5". It feels like the knobs hold the movable half of the
jig securely.

Next I trued up the runners. I don't have a jointer, so I used a router
with a straight bit and a framing square as a guide. Now both are nice
and straight.

---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus
protection is active.
http://www.avast.com


I designed this about 11 years ago. It adjusts to the width of the
board, is portable, and self squares to the board.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/lcb11211/16369566470/
https://www.flickr.com/photos/lcb112...n/photostream/

On 2/17/2015 12:45 AM, Leon wrote:

I designed this about 11 years ago. It adjusts to the width of the
board, is portable, and self squares to the board.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/lcb11211/16369566470/
https://www.flickr.com/photos/lcb112...n/photostream/

There's a design I haven't seen before, and unsurprisingly, also built
much more cleanly than mine.

I'm curious. Why do you need both sides to be snug to the work? Is that
to make doubly sure the jig is square? When you're doing narrow stock,
as in the photo, does the half of the jig that protrudes out toward you
get in your way?

I'm also curious about the bottom; I guess you recessed the heads of the
bolts into the jig? T-bolts I imagine?

I figure I'll eventually build a new jig entirely, incorporating some of
what I've learned from this one. That's why I ask.

Mine "self squares" also, but the guide edge is not as long as I'd like
it to be; another detail I noticed *after* I built it. In this photo you
can see my solution for long stock:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/gdguar...4446/lightbox/

Note the small block that's clamped to the bench at right. There's
another one out of the frame to the other side of the jig. I lined them
up with a straightedge before I started making the cuts. I'm not sure it
was necessary, but it made me feel better about the alignment, and made
it quick to change from one location to the next.

I also found it convenient to stick a piece of 3/4" scrap in one of the
dadoes (the black triangular piece in the photo). That gave me a
convenient "handle" to tap with a mallet to get the placement exactly
right. The uprights in the photo were something like 80" long, so the
ends of the boards were out of reach for many of the cuts.

---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com

Greg Guarino wrote:
On 2/17/2015 12:45 AM, Leon wrote:

I designed this about 11 years ago. It adjusts to the width of the
board, is portable, and self squares to the board.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/lcb11211/16369566470/
https://www.flickr.com/photos/lcb112...n/photostream/

There's a design I haven't seen before, and unsurprisingly, also built
much more cleanly than mine.

I'm curious. Why do you need both sides to be snug to the work? Is that
to make doubly sure the jig is square? When you're doing narrow stock, as
in the photo, does the half of the jig that protrudes out toward you get in your way?

Basically yes, snug it on both sides to help keep it square, and no
nothing gets in the way.


I'm also curious about the bottom; I guess you recessed the heads of the
bolts into the jig? T-bolts I imagine?

Carriage bolts. No need to recess as that portion is never in to tact
with the work.



I figure I'll eventually build a new jig entirely, incorporating some of
what I've learned from this one. That's why I ask.


Not a problem, that's why I posted the pics. :-)

This jog was first designed to use a guide bugging and straight bit, hence
the note on the jig to keep the router clocked in a certain direction. I
later modified it to use a short top bearing fluff cut bit.



Mine "self squares" also, but the guide edge is not as long as I'd like
it to be; another detail I noticed *after* I built it. In this photo you
can see my solution for long stock:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/gdguar...4446/lightbox/

Note the small block that's clamped to the bench at right. There's
another one out of the frame to the other side of the jig. I lined them
up with a straightedge before I started making the cuts. I'm not sure it
was necessary, but it made me feel better about the alignment, and made
it quick to change from one location to the next.

I also found it convenient to stick a piece of 3/4" scrap in one of the
dadoes (the black triangular piece in the photo). That gave me a
convenient "handle" to tap with a mallet to get the placement exactly
right. The uprights in the photo were something like 80" long, so the
ends of the boards were out of reach for many of the cuts.

---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com

On 2/17/2015 7:42 AM, Leon wrote:
Greg Guarino wrote:
On 2/17/2015 12:45 AM, Leon wrote:

I designed this about 11 years ago. It adjusts to the width of the
board, is portable, and self squares to the board.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/lcb11211/16369566470/
https://www.flickr.com/photos/lcb112...n/photostream/

There's a design I haven't seen before, and unsurprisingly, also built
much more cleanly than mine.

I'm curious. Why do you need both sides to be snug to the work? Is that
to make doubly sure the jig is square? When you're doing narrow stock, as
in the photo, does the half of the jig that protrudes out toward you get in your way?

Basically yes, snug it on both sides to help keep it square, and no
nothing gets in the way.


I'm also curious about the bottom; I guess you recessed the heads of the
bolts into the jig? T-bolts I imagine?

Carriage bolts. No need to recess as that portion is never in to tact
with the work.



I figure I'll eventually build a new jig entirely, incorporating some of
what I've learned from this one. That's why I ask.


Not a problem, that's why I posted the pics. :-)

This jog was first designed to use a guide bugging and straight bit, hence
the note on the jig to keep the router clocked in a certain direction. I
later modified it to use a short top bearing fluff cut bit.



Mine "self squares" also, but the guide edge is not as long as I'd like
it to be; another detail I noticed *after* I built it. In this photo you
can see my solution for long stock:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/gdguar...4446/lightbox/

Note the small block that's clamped to the bench at right. There's
another one out of the frame to the other side of the jig. I lined them
up with a straightedge before I started making the cuts. I'm not sure it
was necessary, but it made me feel better about the alignment, and made
it quick to change from one location to the next.

I also found it convenient to stick a piece of 3/4" scrap in one of the
dadoes (the black triangular piece in the photo). That gave me a
convenient "handle" to tap with a mallet to get the placement exactly
right. The uprights in the photo were something like 80" long, so the
ends of the boards were out of reach for many of the cuts.

---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com

Too many type'os to correct. ;~) Thank you iPad for all of that.

On Tuesday, February 17, 2015 at 10:28:04 AM UTC-5, Leon wrote:


Too many type'os to correct. ;~) Thank you iPad for all of that.

My "favorite" iPad auto-correct:

it's not ---- it' snot

I'm anal (but not perfect) about proper typing in texts, etc. so I always make sure that I use apostrophes where appropriate. Unfortunately, the iPad does better without them, usually auto-correcting and adding the apostrophe if I leave it out. The thing is, I'm used to typing the apostrophe and for some reason the iPad loves to auto-correct "apostrophe s" by moving the s to the beginning of the next word, sometimes retaining the next word, sometimes changing it. That sometimes results in some pretty strange sentences.

It's cold ---- It' scold
That's bad ---- That' shad (is that Shad the rapper or Shad the fish?)

On 2/17/2015 9:55 AM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
On Tuesday, February 17, 2015 at 10:28:04 AM UTC-5, Leon wrote:


Too many type'os to correct. ;~) Thank you iPad for all of that.

My "favorite" iPad auto-correct:

it's not ---- it' snot

I'm anal (but not perfect) about proper typing in texts, etc. so I always make sure that I use apostrophes where appropriate. Unfortunately, the iPad does better without them, usually auto-correcting and adding the apostrophe if I leave it out. The thing is, I'm used to typing the apostrophe and for some reason the iPad loves to auto-correct "apostrophe s" by moving the s to the beginning of the next word, sometimes retaining the next word, sometimes changing it. That sometimes results in some pretty strange sentences.

It's cold ---- It' scold
That's bad ---- That' shad (is that Shad the rapper or Shad the fish?)


And if you think that is bad try dictating to the iPad! ;~)

On Tuesday, February 17, 2015 at 6:18:41 PM UTC-5, Leon wrote:
On 2/17/2015 9:55 AM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
On Tuesday, February 17, 2015 at 10:28:04 AM UTC-5, Leon wrote:


Too many type'os to correct. ;~) Thank you iPad for all of that.

My "favorite" iPad auto-correct:

it's not ---- it' snot

I'm anal (but not perfect) about proper typing in texts, etc. so I always make sure that I use apostrophes where appropriate. Unfortunately, the iPad does better without them, usually auto-correcting and adding the apostrophe if I leave it out. The thing is, I'm used to typing the apostrophe and for some reason the iPad loves to auto-correct "apostrophe s" by moving the s to the beginning of the next word, sometimes retaining the next word, sometimes changing it. That sometimes results in some pretty strange sentences.

It's cold ---- It' scold
That's bad ---- That' shad (is that Shad the rapper or Shad the fish?)


And if you think that is bad try dictating to the iPad! ;~)

This unedited response was recorded onto my iPad using the Dragon application. I don't know how it will come out because I don't use the application very often. When I am done recording I'm simply going to copy and paste it into rec.woodworking to see how it comes out. If it comes out good that's what you see, if it comes out bad you'll see that also. I'm now going to end the recording. Let's see how it came out. I wish me luck.