I've been re-reading some of my old FWW magazines. An issue from 1994
told the readers about the existence of rec.woodworking. A quote from
the article:

"...things forbidden on rec.woodworking are off-topic messages (e.g.
politics ..."

---

----

-----

Finished laughing yet?

In the same issue was an article about building a gate-leg table. The
author used a mortise and tenon jig which was just a piece of plywood
about 6" x 12" with a 6" x 3" block across the 6" to serve as a fence.
The jig was simply held on edge against the rip fence with the piece to
be tenoned held in it vertically by the same hand. The other hand pushed
the jig along the fence and past the blade.

The only picture showing it in use showed a piece around a foot long
being tenoned - reasonably safe as long as the worker doesn't slip, lose
his grip, get vertigo, or even sneeze :-).

But the author states that he used that jig for all the tenons in the
table. The tenoned rails are 55" - almost 5 feet! Can you imagine
standing one of those on end and shoving it past the blade with only one
hand's pressure to keep it vertical and against the fence?

My thought is that the author's nickname is either "Lucky" or "Stubby".

But there were no comments about his technique in the next two issues.
Am I missing something?

On 07/15/2015 01:45 PM, Larry Blanchard wrote:
....
snip
But there were no comments about his technique in the next two issues.
Am I missing something?

If I'm envisioning this right, I'd expect he probably used a clamp to
hold the leg in place rather than rely on his hand grip. Still kind of
dicey, but probably safe enough if you took moderate bites...

--
Kevin Miller
Juneau, Alaska
http://www.alaska.net/~atftb
"In the history of the world, no one has ever washed a rented car."
- Lawrence Summers

On 07/15/2015 4:45 PM, Larry Blanchard wrote:
....

author used a mortise and tenon jig which was just a piece of plywood
about 6" x 12" with a 6" x 3" block across the 6" to serve as a fence.
The jig was simply held on edge against the rip fence with the piece to
be tenoned held in it vertically by the same hand. The other hand pushed
the jig along the fence and past the blade.

....

My thought is that the author's nickname is either "Lucky" or "Stubby".

But there were no comments about his technique in the next two issues.
Am I missing something?

I've used very similar setups for 40+ yr w/ nary an accident. As
another responder has said for the longer rails I'd almost certainly
also use a clamp rather than just hold them there but I don't find the
method risky at all--you're just cutting a fairly short (1" to 2" at
most) straight cut thru a fairly small piece; a good saw and blade will
hardly know it so there isn't any effort needed...an underpowered saw or
dull blade is something else again, though.

--

Larry Blanchard wrote in
:

I've been re-reading some of my old FWW magazines. An issue from 1994
told the readers about the existence of rec.woodworking.

I've been re-reading American Woodworker from the 90's also.
A ton of great stuff in those magazines, it's a shame they
got sold and sold again, and lost quality each time.

But the author states that he used that jig for all the tenons in the
table. The tenoned rails are 55" - almost 5 feet! Can you imagine
standing one of those on end and shoving it past the blade with only
one hand's pressure to keep it vertical and against the fence?

The idea of standing a 5 foot board on end, and working it
across any power tool, boggles my mind. That's a cut to be
made on the bandsaw, or with a hand saw.

John

On 07/15/2015 6:32 PM, dpb wrote:
....

I've used very similar setups for 40+ yr w/ nary an accident. As another
responder has said for the longer rails I'd almost certainly also use a
clamp rather than just hold them there but I don't find the method risky
at all--you're just cutting a fairly short (1" to 2" at most) straight
cut thru a fairly small piece; a good saw and blade will hardly know it
so there isn't any effort needed...an underpowered saw or dull blade is
something else again, though.

I will add that I modified the rig a little from that described by
adding a hook so it actually slides over the fence, not just riding it
against the fence...

--

On Wednesday, July 15, 2015 at 8:54:51 PM UTC-5, dpb wrote:

I will add that I modified the rig a little from that described by
adding a hook so it actually slides over the fence, not just riding it
against the fence...

Yep, fence-top guide, plus, I have a similar/wider ply jig that is also guided by a "runner" in the miter slot. ....*for short-lumber tenons.

As John says, for long-lumber tenons, use a bandsaw or hand saw. Can never be too cautious, especially with "awkward" positioned pieces/cutting.

Sonny

On 07/16/2015 8:56 AM, Sonny wrote:
On Wednesday, July 15, 2015 at 8:54:51 PM UTC-5, dpb wrote:

....

As John says, for long-lumber tenons, use a bandsaw or hand saw. Can
never be too cautious, especially with "awkward" positioned
pieces/cutting.

But it _isn't_ awkward when in place, it's simply sticking up vertically
for a single slice cut..."awkward" would be if it had the 'ell' of a
secondary rail/stile attached to make a moment arm or the like but when
it's all vertical, it's simple enough. I wouldn't with a 4x6 6-ft long
(say) owing to weight but a simple rail/stile/leg/apron it's simple and
quick and not unsafe.

The alternatives are certainly ok and if you're uncomfortable with the
setup then by all means use one of them instead...

--

On Wed, 15 Jul 2015 20:54:49 -0500, dpb wrote:

I will add that I modified the rig a little from that described by
adding a hook so it actually slides over the fence, not just riding it
against the fence...


That "little" makes it considerably safer.

On Thu, 16 Jul 2015 00:59:26 +0000, John McCoy wrote:

The idea of standing a 5 foot board on end, and working it across any
power tool, boggles my mind. That's a cut to be made on the bandsaw, or
with a hand saw.

That was certainly my reaction. And I hope the article author had at
least an 8' ceiling with nothing hanging down from it :-).

On 7/16/2015 12:29 PM, Larry Blanchard wrote:
On Thu, 16 Jul 2015 00:59:26 +0000, John McCoy wrote:

The idea of standing a 5 foot board on end, and working it across any
power tool, boggles my mind. That's a cut to be made on the bandsaw, or
with a hand saw.

That was certainly my reaction. And I hope the article author had at
least an 8' ceiling with nothing hanging down from it :-).

In my inexpert opinion, we are sometimes seduced by the fact that even
pretty stupid things usually result in no injury. "I know a guy who does
that *all the time*". Human beings aren't always good at evaluating low
probabilities. I try to remember that it's a bad idea to increase your
chance of being hurt, even if the increase might be from 1 in 5000 to 1
in 100. This is especially important when the "1" is a lost finger.

On Thu, 16 Jul 2015 12:53:59 -0400, Greg Guarino
wrote:

On 7/16/2015 12:29 PM, Larry Blanchard wrote:
On Thu, 16 Jul 2015 00:59:26 +0000, John McCoy wrote:

The idea of standing a 5 foot board on end, and working it across any
power tool, boggles my mind. That's a cut to be made on the bandsaw, or
with a hand saw.

That was certainly my reaction. And I hope the article author had at
least an 8' ceiling with nothing hanging down from it :-).

In my inexpert opinion, we are sometimes seduced by the fact that even
pretty stupid things usually result in no injury. "I know a guy who does
that *all the time*". Human beings aren't always good at evaluating low
probabilities. I try to remember that it's a bad idea to increase your
chance of being hurt, even if the increase might be from 1 in 5000 to 1
in 100. This is especially important when the "1" is a lost finger.

Right but on the other hand, a 1 in 10M chance may be worth it over a
1 in 20M chance if your life is going to be made better (think cancer
and drugs). The difference is a 50% increase in something bad
happening but it's not a 50% chance of something bad happening, as is
often implied by the MSM.

On 07/16/2015 11:25 AM, Larry Blanchard wrote:
On Wed, 15 Jul 2015 20:54:49 -0500, dpb wrote:

I will add that I modified the rig a little from that described by
adding a hook so it actually slides over the fence, not just riding it
against the fence...


That "little" makes it considerably safer.

Granted. It's far more stable and since don't have to worry about
keeping it against the fence much more reliably accurate.

--

Greg Guarino wrote in
:

Human beings aren't always good at
evaluating low probabilities. I try to remember that it's a bad idea
to increase your chance of being hurt, even if the increase might be
from 1 in 5000 to 1 in 100. This is especially important when the "1"
is a lost finger.

The other thing to bear in mind is, if you know a safer way
to do it, the probabilities are irrelevant. You do it the
safer way.

John

In article ,
says...

Greg Guarino wrote in
:

Human beings aren't always good at
evaluating low probabilities. I try to remember that it's a bad idea
to increase your chance of being hurt, even if the increase might be
from 1 in 5000 to 1 in 100. This is especially important when the "1"
is a lost finger.

The other thing to bear in mind is, if you know a safer way
to do it, the probabilities are irrelevant. You do it the
safer way.

John

For certain values.

There are safer ways to commute to work than on a motorcycle.
Nonetheless many of us commute on motorcycles.

On Thu, 16 Jul 2015 20:44:04 -0400, J. Clarke wrote:

There are safer ways to commute to work than on a motorcycle.
Nonetheless many of us commute on motorcycles.

Agreed. I did it for 20 years or more. But I stopped doing it for the
10 years I lived in the Los Angeles area :-).

On Fri, 17 Jul 2015 00:19:59 +0000 (UTC), John McCoy
wrote:

Greg Guarino wrote in
:

Human beings aren't always good at
evaluating low probabilities. I try to remember that it's a bad idea
to increase your chance of being hurt, even if the increase might be
from 1 in 5000 to 1 in 100. This is especially important when the "1"
is a lost finger.

The other thing to bear in mind is, if you know a safer way
to do it, the probabilities are irrelevant. You do it the
safer way.

Life is all about cost/benefit tradeoffs. The cost side doesn't tell
the whole story.

On Thu, 16 Jul 2015 22:03:11 -0400, krw wrote:

On Fri, 17 Jul 2015 00:19:59 +0000 (UTC), John McCoy
wrote:

Greg Guarino wrote in
:

Human beings aren't always good at
evaluating low probabilities. I try to remember that it's a bad idea
to increase your chance of being hurt, even if the increase might be
from 1 in 5000 to 1 in 100. This is especially important when the "1"
is a lost finger.

The other thing to bear in mind is, if you know a safer way
to do it, the probabilities are irrelevant. You do it the
safer way.

Life is all about cost/benefit tradeoffs. The cost side doesn't tell
the whole story.
On nice days I sometimes ride my bike to work It's only a couple
kilometers. In the morning it's rush hour, so I use a trail half the
way - at noon the traffic is light so I often use the road all the
way. I see more car accidents than bike accidents - and if I get
killed in a car accident I'm just as dead as on the bike - just die
faster on the bike? Better chance of serious injury on the bike, but
I accept the risk.

Won't ride the bike in the rain or after dark - or on some of the more
congested streets.

In article ,
says...

On Thu, 16 Jul 2015 22:03:11 -0400, krw wrote:

On Fri, 17 Jul 2015 00:19:59 +0000 (UTC), John McCoy
wrote:

Greg Guarino wrote in
:

Human beings aren't always good at
evaluating low probabilities. I try to remember that it's a bad idea
to increase your chance of being hurt, even if the increase might be
from 1 in 5000 to 1 in 100. This is especially important when the "1"
is a lost finger.

The other thing to bear in mind is, if you know a safer way
to do it, the probabilities are irrelevant. You do it the
safer way.

Life is all about cost/benefit tradeoffs. The cost side doesn't tell
the whole story.
On nice days I sometimes ride my bike to work It's only a couple
kilometers. In the morning it's rush hour, so I use a trail half the
way - at noon the traffic is light so I often use the road all the
way. I see more car accidents than bike accidents - and if I get
killed in a car accident I'm just as dead as on the bike - just die
faster on the bike? Better chance of serious injury on the bike, but
I accept the risk.

I see more cars than bicycles on the way to work, so it is not
surprising that I see more "car accidents"--the "I see more car
accidents" argument just falls flat.

And while you're just as dead if you get killed, a car hitting a
bicyclist doesn't even slow the car down, but if the bicyclist makes it
to the emergency room he's lucky. All accidents do not result in
fatalities you know.

Won't ride the bike in the rain or after dark - or on some of the more
congested streets.

On Fri, 17 Jul 2015 06:10:50 -0400, "J. Clarke"
wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Thu, 16 Jul 2015 22:03:11 -0400, krw wrote:

On Fri, 17 Jul 2015 00:19:59 +0000 (UTC), John McCoy
wrote:

Greg Guarino wrote in
:

Human beings aren't always good at
evaluating low probabilities. I try to remember that it's a bad idea
to increase your chance of being hurt, even if the increase might be
from 1 in 5000 to 1 in 100. This is especially important when the "1"
is a lost finger.

The other thing to bear in mind is, if you know a safer way
to do it, the probabilities are irrelevant. You do it the
safer way.

Life is all about cost/benefit tradeoffs. The cost side doesn't tell
the whole story.
On nice days I sometimes ride my bike to work It's only a couple
kilometers. In the morning it's rush hour, so I use a trail half the
way - at noon the traffic is light so I often use the road all the
way. I see more car accidents than bike accidents - and if I get
killed in a car accident I'm just as dead as on the bike - just die
faster on the bike? Better chance of serious injury on the bike, but
I accept the risk.

I see more cars than bicycles on the way to work, so it is not
surprising that I see more "car accidents"--the "I see more car
accidents" argument just falls flat.

But I only go to work once a day, so it is not the accidents per
person mile travelled or anything else that is relevant - only the
chances of being involved in an accident on the way to or from work on
the bike vs the truck.

And while you're just as dead if you get killed, a car hitting a
bicyclist doesn't even slow the car down, but if the bicyclist makes it
to the emergency room he's lucky. All accidents do not result in
fatalities you know.


Which is why I stated " Better chance of serious injury on the bike".

I gave up riding the Motorcycle because I demed the risk to be higher
than my wife was willing to accept.

Won't ride the bike in the rain or after dark - or on some of the more
congested streets.

"J. Clarke" wrote in
:

In article ,
says...

The other thing to bear in mind is, if you know a safer way
to do it, the probabilities are irrelevant. You do it the
safer way.

For certain values.

There are safer ways to commute to work than on a motorcycle.
Nonetheless many of us commute on motorcycles.

That's a bit of an apples and oranges comparison. The three
ways listed to cut a tenon (table saw, bandsaw, hand saw) are
essentially equivalent, the tenon comes out the same. Given
that, it makes sense to pick the safer one.

No-one who rides a motorcycle would say riding is equivalent
to driving a car.

John

(rides a Yamaha R1)

In article ,
says...

"J. Clarke" wrote in
:

In article ,
says...

The other thing to bear in mind is, if you know a safer way
to do it, the probabilities are irrelevant. You do it the
safer way.

For certain values.

There are safer ways to commute to work than on a motorcycle.
Nonetheless many of us commute on motorcycles.

That's a bit of an apples and oranges comparison. The three
ways listed to cut a tenon (table saw, bandsaw, hand saw) are
essentially equivalent, the tenon comes out the same. Given
that, it makes sense to pick the safer one.

No-one who rides a motorcycle would say riding is equivalent
to driving a car.

But it is in the sense that the outcome is the same, you get to work.

It is not the destination that is at issue, it is the method. If you
insisted on using the safest _possible_ method to make the tenon, you
might have it made using an NC machine with a solid barrier and
significant distance between you and the machine. The outcome would be
the same, you would still have the tenon.

On 7/17/2015 3:56 PM, John McCoy wrote:
"J. Clarke" wrote in
:

In article ,
says...

The other thing to bear in mind is, if you know a safer way
to do it, the probabilities are irrelevant. You do it the
safer way.

For certain values.

There are safer ways to commute to work than on a motorcycle.
Nonetheless many of us commute on motorcycles.

That's a bit of an apples and oranges comparison. The three
ways listed to cut a tenon (table saw, bandsaw, hand saw) are
essentially equivalent

They aren't equivalent in terms of speed and precision.

, the tenon comes out the same. Given
that, it makes sense to pick the safer one.

No-one who rides a motorcycle would say riding is equivalent
to driving a car.

John

(rides a Yamaha R1)