jointer/planer combination
 

In the past few years, the tool manufacturers have come up with low
cost options to larger, more expensive tools (e.g. the portable
planer) and innovative tools that solve problems that have existed
forever.

One conflict that still exists that I have not seen a good solution
for is a jointer that matches the width requirements that an average
woodworker has. I have boards that are nearly always wider than 6
inches. Not by much, but wider none the less. I don't want to rip
them. I can hand plane them and I know there are several innovative
solutions for jointing wide boards, but a jointer that more nearly
matches the planer but is not thousands in cost, hundreds of pounds in
weight or 10 ft. in length would be as innovative as the portable
planer was when it came out. I know the general consensus is that you
can't get around the length or weight (and therefore the cost), but I
am sure most people thought that you could never get a $250 planer 15
or 20 years ago. Most 7 inch wide boards are not 10 ft. long. when I
joint them.

There have been combo jointer/planer machines in the past, but they
have been pricey and apparently not viewed as the solution because I
don't see them in quantity for sale anywhere. Most of the posts
discussing them on the rec date from about 1996.

Well, does anyone else feel this way, or am I alone in being concerned
about this?

On 29 Sep 2004 03:28:22 -0700, (Eric Anderson)
wrote:

There have been combo jointer/planer machines in the past,

Have you looked at Europe ? The typical machine is a combination, for
10" wide and up to 6" thick.

--
Smert' spamionam

Reason is simple. You really don't _need_ as wide a jointer as you think you
do. Knocking the high spots off / shimming the low spots up prior to
planing a wide board, or fully supporting it on a planer sled will handle
even the worst case scenario. Most boards plane adequately by taking light
cuts and alternating properly.

The piddling European machines Andy mentions have jointer tables which,
according to the rec "wisdom" are too short for proper use.

"Eric Anderson" wrote in message
om...
One conflict that still exists that I have not seen a good solution
for is a jointer that matches the width requirements that an average
woodworker has.

The piddling European machines Andy mentions have jointer tables which,
according to the rec "wisdom" are too short for proper use.


I assume you refer to the Inca 550 type machine. I agree their short tables
aren't great, they have a bolt on extension feature which works well. I've
used a 550 for years now and it does a fine job. I often joint 8' long
boards on this machine.

--

Rumpty

Radial Arm Saw Forum: http://forums.delphiforums.com/woodbutcher/start

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -


"George" george@least wrote in message
...
Reason is simple. You really don't _need_ as wide a jointer as you think
you
do. Knocking the high spots off / shimming the low spots up prior to
planing a wide board, or fully supporting it on a planer sled will handle
even the worst case scenario. Most boards plane adequately by taking
light
cuts and alternating properly.

The piddling European machines Andy mentions have jointer tables which,
according to the rec "wisdom" are too short for proper use.

"Eric Anderson" wrote in message
om...
One conflict that still exists that I have not seen a good solution
for is a jointer that matches the width requirements that an average
woodworker has.

On Wed, 29 Sep 2004 07:40:51 -0400, "George" george@least wrote:

The piddling European machines Andy mentions have jointer tables which,
according to the rec "wisdom" are too short for proper use.

You might note that I don't have one myself. Mainly because they're
too narrow though - I thickness lots of 13" timber.

Some of them are a reasonable length - the Sedgewicks are as solid and
well made as anyone might wish and they're plenty big enough for
anyone short of a straight-edge factory.

--
Smert' spamionam

On 29 Sep 2004 03:28:22 -0700, (Eric Anderson)
wrote:

In the past few years, the tool manufacturers have come up with low
cost options to larger, more expensive tools (e.g. the portable
planer) and innovative tools that solve problems that have existed
forever.

One conflict that still exists that I have not seen a good solution
for is a jointer that matches the width requirements that an average
woodworker has. I have boards that are nearly always wider than 6
inches. Not by much, but wider none the less.


sounds like you should be shopping for an 8" jointer.



I don't want to rip
them. I can hand plane them and I know there are several innovative
solutions for jointing wide boards, but a jointer that more nearly
matches the planer but is not thousands in cost, hundreds of pounds in
weight or 10 ft. in length would be as innovative as the portable
planer was when it came out. I know the general consensus is that you
can't get around the length or weight (and therefore the cost), but I
am sure most people thought that you could never get a $250 planer 15
or 20 years ago.

that'd probably have to be 25 years ago. ryobi came out with the ap10
at least 20 years ago.



Most 7 inch wide boards are not 10 ft. long. when I
joint them.





There have been combo jointer/planer machines in the past, but they
have been pricey and apparently not viewed as the solution because I
don't see them in quantity for sale anywhere. Most of the posts
discussing them on the rec date from about 1996.

Well, does anyone else feel this way, or am I alone in being concerned
about this?


I'd love to have a 16" jointer and a 16" wide planer. I have neither
the floor space nor the capital for it though. and a combination of
the two sounds like a nightmare to keep serviced.

here's one of the problems with combining the two- in order for it to
make any sense from a machinery point of view you'd want to dual
purpose the cutterhead. since planers generally have the cutter over
the table and jointers have it under you either have to be able to
remove the upper half of the planer (and be fiddling with the tables
all of the time) or have 2 sets of tables, with the planer running
under the jointer, which pretty much leaves you with really short
jointer tables. there are machines that get around this by having 2
cutterheads side by side, but they have narrow jointers.

From another point of view, he's looking to face plane, not edge joint. In
those cases, say with a 6'x10" board, it's rare that you really need a board
that's flat along the entire length of its face. And, if it were so, it
probably wouldn't stay that way for very long. Other than for a workbench
slab, that is.

As it'll typically be locked down to a frame or other supports, you do need it
flat across the width, and flat for a short distance along the length of the
face. Your thickness planer suggestion meets those requirements. I've done
that with quantities of rough lumber.
GerryG

On Wed, 29 Sep 2004 07:40:51 -0400, "George" george@least wrote:

Reason is simple. You really don't _need_ as wide a jointer as you think you
do. Knocking the high spots off / shimming the low spots up prior to
planing a wide board, or fully supporting it on a planer sled will handle
even the worst case scenario. Most boards plane adequately by taking light
cuts and alternating properly.

The piddling European machines Andy mentions have jointer tables which,
according to the rec "wisdom" are too short for proper use.

"Eric Anderson" wrote in message
. com...
One conflict that still exists that I have not seen a good solution
for is a jointer that matches the width requirements that an average
woodworker has.

For what it's worth I have a 20/30 Makita planer joiner gathering dustthat i
would like to get rid of. The rollers need to be resurfaced ,around here
that runs about $100 each.

The machine, [And I am no fan of makita] has a 12" planer 6 " joiner
combination.both produce excellent results. the joiner has a long bed ,as
long as my grizzleguts 8" joiner.

One advantage is the rollers not being metal allow very fine thickness
adjustments without the impressions left by a serated infeed roller. The
drive being basically a 3 horse router motor results in high revving
cutterheads and superb surface finishes .mjh

--
http://members.tripod.com/mikehide2
"Eric Anderson" wrote in message
om...
In the past few years, the tool manufacturers have come up with low
cost options to larger, more expensive tools (e.g. the portable
planer) and innovative tools that solve problems that have existed
forever.

One conflict that still exists that I have not seen a good solution
for is a jointer that matches the width requirements that an average
woodworker has. I have boards that are nearly always wider than 6
inches. Not by much, but wider none the less. I don't want to rip
them. I can hand plane them and I know there are several innovative
solutions for jointing wide boards, but a jointer that more nearly
matches the planer but is not thousands in cost, hundreds of pounds in
weight or 10 ft. in length would be as innovative as the portable
planer was when it came out. I know the general consensus is that you
can't get around the length or weight (and therefore the cost), but I
am sure most people thought that you could never get a $250 planer 15
or 20 years ago. Most 7 inch wide boards are not 10 ft. long. when I
joint them.

There have been combo jointer/planer machines in the past, but they
have been pricey and apparently not viewed as the solution because I
don't see them in quantity for sale anywhere. Most of the posts
discussing them on the rec date from about 1996.

Well, does anyone else feel this way, or am I alone in being concerned
about this?

I would guess that those boards would be about as long regardless of the
intended use, wouldn't you? Of course it makes sense to crosscut _any_
stock prior to joining/planing to reduce the amount of adjustment required
to get it flat, which characteristic, by the way, is what allows you to join
it at right angles to the face.

"GerryG" wrote in message
...
From another point of view, he's looking to face plane, not edge joint. In
those cases, say with a 6'x10" board, it's rare that you really need a
board
that's flat along the entire length of its face. And, if it were so, it
probably wouldn't stay that way for very long. Other than for a workbench
slab, that is.

As it'll typically be locked down to a frame or other supports, you do
need it
flat across the width, and flat for a short distance along the length of
the
face. Your thickness planer suggestion meets those requirements. I've done
that with quantities of rough lumber.
GerryG

On Wed, 29 Sep 2004 07:40:51 -0400, "George" george@least wrote:

Reason is simple. You really don't _need_ as wide a jointer as you think
you
do. Knocking the high spots off / shimming the low spots up prior to
planing a wide board, or fully supporting it on a planer sled will handle
even the worst case scenario. Most boards plane adequately by taking
light
cuts and alternating properly.

The piddling European machines Andy mentions have jointer tables which,
according to the rec "wisdom" are too short for proper use.

"Eric Anderson" wrote in message
. com...
One conflict that still exists that I have not seen a good solution
for is a jointer that matches the width requirements that an average
woodworker has.

Agreed, but consider the mechanics here when joining at right angles against
the face. If the face board is long related to its width, it'll probably not
stay exactly flat, but will be drawn against the edge of the connected board.
It's when the face board is short and wide that it needs to be really flat, as
it's then difficult to draw it in with fasteners. While a thickness planer is
generally thought to be only making the two faces parallel, it also makes it
flat across the width, and will also make it reasonably flat across the length
of the bed. It's those last two items that make it more useful for many
projects, especially when alternating faces as you suggested.
GerryG

On Thu, 30 Sep 2004 06:54:13 -0400, "George" george@least wrote:

I would guess that those boards would be about as long regardless of the
intended use, wouldn't you? Of course it makes sense to crosscut _any_
stock prior to joining/planing to reduce the amount of adjustment required
to get it flat, which characteristic, by the way, is what allows you to join
it at right angles to the face.

"GerryG" wrote in message
.. .
From another point of view, he's looking to face plane, not edge joint. In
those cases, say with a 6'x10" board, it's rare that you really need a
board
that's flat along the entire length of its face. And, if it were so, it
probably wouldn't stay that way for very long. Other than for a workbench
slab, that is.

As it'll typically be locked down to a frame or other supports, you do
need it
flat across the width, and flat for a short distance along the length of
the
face. Your thickness planer suggestion meets those requirements. I've done
that with quantities of rough lumber.
GerryG

On Wed, 29 Sep 2004 07:40:51 -0400, "George" george@least wrote:

Reason is simple. You really don't _need_ as wide a jointer as you think
you
do. Knocking the high spots off / shimming the low spots up prior to
planing a wide board, or fully supporting it on a planer sled will handle
even the worst case scenario. Most boards plane adequately by taking
light
cuts and alternating properly.

The piddling European machines Andy mentions have jointer tables which,
according to the rec "wisdom" are too short for proper use.

"Eric Anderson" wrote in message
. com...
One conflict that still exists that I have not seen a good solution
for is a jointer that matches the width requirements that an average
woodworker has.

Well, as nearly as I follow, I have to disagree. When you use a jointer to
make the edge perpendicular to the face, its perpendicularity depends on the
flatness of the face riding against the fence. Upon this depends the entire
joint, regardless of external help. Out of perpendicular, unless you're
lucky enough to find a complementary error, is a gap.

I am also not an "alternate" smile type on glueups. I'm a sap to sap, heart
to heart best match type, and, sadly one of the few who would agree with you
that careful thickness planing can take minor defects like crown (cup). It
is, however, incapable of taking out twist or bow. For that you need the
jointer or plane.

"GerryG" wrote in message
...
Agreed, but consider the mechanics here when joining at right angles
against
the face. If the face board is long related to its width, it'll probably
not
stay exactly flat, but will be drawn against the edge of the connected
board.
It's when the face board is short and wide that it needs to be really
flat, as
it's then difficult to draw it in with fasteners. While a thickness planer
is
generally thought to be only making the two faces parallel, it also makes
it
flat across the width, and will also make it reasonably flat across the
length
of the bed. It's those last two items that make it more useful for many
projects, especially when alternating faces as you suggested.
GerryG

So what is that unit worth? It was about $1500 new I think back in
1988. I bid $500 on one from a shop I used to work at. It did not have
much use.

"Mike Hide" wrote:

For what it's worth I have a 20/30 Makita planer joiner gathering dustthat i
would like to get rid of. The rollers need to be resurfaced ,around here
that runs about $100 each.

The machine, [And I am no fan of makita] has a 12" planer 6 " joiner
combination.both produce excellent results. the joiner has a long bed ,as
long as my grizzleguts 8" joiner.

One advantage is the rollers not being metal allow very fine thickness
adjustments without the impressions left by a serated infeed roller. The
drive being basically a 3 horse router motor results in high revving
cutterheads and superb surface finishes .mjh

An 8" jointer would probably do it, but it is heavy, expensive and
large.

What about taking the motor and cutterhead of a 12" planer and turning
it upside down, putting a steel bed and fence on it? Would we not
have the jointer equivalent of the cast iron planer turned into the
stamped steel portable planer?

By the way, I often use the planer on rough sawn planks, as described
above, that are in good condition, but to be entirely kosher about it,
a planer turned upside down with a well formed stamped steel short bed
and fence seems like a possible way of going. Sure would not be the
nice, quiet machine that the present jointers are, however.

wrote in message . ..
On 29 Sep 2004 03:28:22 -0700, (Eric Anderson)
wrote:


sounds like you should be shopping for an 8" jointer.

In article ,
says...

snip
There have been combo jointer/planer machines in the past, but they
have been pricey and apparently not viewed as the solution because I
don't see them in quantity for sale anywhere. Most of the posts
discussing them on the rec date from about 1996.

Well, does anyone else feel this way, or am I alone in being concerned
about this?

I have a Kity (European) combo. 254mm jointer / planer. It is a solid
machine and does what it is supposed to do BUT what a pain changing from
one setup to another. In retrospect I would have been off with 2
dedicated machines.
Will never get a combo machine again. Get a machine to do its specific
job and not have to fart around adjusting settings from one setup to
another.
The cost of 2 machines would have been a bit more than the combo but
well worth it.

--

Phillip Hansen
Skil-Phil Solutions

I have a Hitachi combination planer/jointer and there is no set-up change to
be done. Have had it for 8 years and it has done very well so far. Was Best
rated in Wood Magazine at the time.

Chuck Callaghan


"Phil Hansen" wrote in message
...
In article ,
says...

snip
There have been combo jointer/planer machines in the past, but they
have been pricey and apparently not viewed as the solution because I
don't see them in quantity for sale anywhere. Most of the posts
discussing them on the rec date from about 1996.

Well, does anyone else feel this way, or am I alone in being concerned
about this?

I have a Kity (European) combo. 254mm jointer / planer. It is a solid
machine and does what it is supposed to do BUT what a pain changing from
one setup to another. In retrospect I would have been off with 2
dedicated machines.
Will never get a combo machine again. Get a machine to do its specific
job and not have to fart around adjusting settings from one setup to
another.
The cost of 2 machines would have been a bit more than the combo but
well worth it.

--

Phillip Hansen
Skil-Phil Solutions

On 30 Sep 2004 13:38:52 -0700, (Eric Anderson)
wrote:

An 8" jointer would probably do it, but it is heavy, expensive and
large.

What about taking the motor and cutterhead of a 12" planer and turning
it upside down, putting a steel bed and fence on it? Would we not
have the jointer equivalent of the cast iron planer turned into the
stamped steel portable planer?

By the way, I often use the planer on rough sawn planks, as described
above, that are in good condition, but to be entirely kosher about it,
a planer turned upside down with a well formed stamped steel short bed
and fence seems like a possible way of going. Sure would not be the
nice, quiet machine that the present jointers are, however.

sounds like a lot of dinking about to achieve a kludge. if what you
like is dinking about with machines it could be worth it. I DO like
dinking about with machines, but that one's going on the list of
things to think about again in 10 years.

I paid $600 for a 70's rockwell delta 8" jointer. it's on wheels. it's
big, but for my shop it's about right. I'm not sure how you're going
to get long enough tables on your 12" frankenplaner to be useful
without running into the same space issues. heck, with a sled in the
planer you can joint short wide pieces in the thicknesser and still
have it as a thicknesser.

On Fri, 1 Oct 2004 12:56:43 -0400, "Charles Callaghan"
wrote:

I have a Hitachi combination planer/jointer and there is no set-up change to
be done. Have had it for 8 years and it has done very well so far. Was Best
rated in Wood Magazine at the time.


yabbutt.... what size is the jointer?

--
http://members.tripod.com/mikehide2
wrote in message
...
On Fri, 1 Oct 2004 12:56:43 -0400, "Charles Callaghan"
wrote:

I have a Hitachi combination planer/jointer and there is no set-up change
to
be done. Have had it for 8 years and it has done very well so far. Was
Best
rated in Wood Magazine at the time.


yabbutt.... what size is the jointer?

Same as the makita 6"....mjh

"Mike Hide" wrote in message news:Gkq7d.398899$8_6.105424@attbi_s04...
yabbutt.... what size is the jointer?

Same as the makita 6"....mjh

Jointer/planer combos that exist have been brought up several times.
My whole point was price and width of the jointer.

Why do these combo machines not make use of the wider planer blade
that is available (I have never seen them up close, so the reason may
be obvious).

I can understand that a combo machine might be difficult to make at a
pricepoint that would be competitive to a 6" jointer and planer combo.
Such a machine should sell for under $800 in order to be comparible
to buying both machines (between $350-$400 for planer, $400-$450 for
jointer).

Still think a jointer built around the idea of the portable planer
that is around 10" would be a good companion to the portable planers
of today. Such a machine should have a pricepoint around the cast
iron 6" jointer. Dewalt seems like the company that would come up
with such a product. Hey, Dewalt--just send the royality checks to my
Paypal account.

On 3 Oct 2004 07:32:39 -0700, (Eric Anderson)
wrote:

"Mike Hide" wrote in message news:Gkq7d.398899$8_6.105424@attbi_s04...
yabbutt.... what size is the jointer?

Same as the makita 6"....mjh

Jointer/planer combos that exist have been brought up several times.
My whole point was price and width of the jointer.

Why do these combo machines not make use of the wider planer blade
that is available (I have never seen them up close, so the reason may
be obvious).

I can understand that a combo machine might be difficult to make at a
pricepoint that would be competitive to a 6" jointer and planer combo.
Such a machine should sell for under $800 in order to be comparible
to buying both machines (between $350-$400 for planer, $400-$450 for
jointer).

Still think a jointer built around the idea of the portable planer
that is around 10" would be a good companion to the portable planers
of today. Such a machine should have a pricepoint around the cast
iron 6" jointer. Dewalt seems like the company that would come up
with such a product. Hey, Dewalt--just send the royality checks to my
Paypal account.


you're talking about a machine that is jointer only? so you'd end up
with a 12 to 14" jointer with short sheetmetal tables, probably a
benchtop machine. this might be a good place to use the parallelogram
configuration of some of the newer delta and griz machines. it'll be
hella loud and obnoxious for a jointer, and with the small diameter
cutterhead will be hard to get smooth surfaces on handheld boards.
interesting idea, though....