Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
Woodworking (rec.woodworking) Discussion forum covering all aspects of working with wood. All levels of expertise are encouraged to particiapte. |
Reply |
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Jointer vs Table saw cut quality
In a separate thread, a discussion has evolved to discussing the difference
between the quality of a surface prepared by a jointer and that of a rip from a tablesaw. I believe that if all of the equipment is setup properly, all blades are quality ones, sharp and the procedures are sound, a jointer will still render a better quality surface than a tablesaw time and time again. Thoughts? Dave |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
"TeamCasa" wrote in message ... In a separate thread, a discussion has evolved to discussing the difference between the quality of a surface prepared by a jointer and that of a rip from a tablesaw. I believe that if all of the equipment is setup properly, all blades are quality ones, sharp and the procedures are sound, a jointer will still render a better quality surface than a tablesaw time and time again. Thoughts? Dave Yup - though a table saw is potentially capable of turing out a cut perfectly suitable for glue up. Sometimes I get those, and sometimes I reach for my plane. -- -Mike- |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
"TeamCasa" writes: I believe that if all of the equipment is setup properly, all blades are quality ones, sharp and the procedures are sound, a jointer will still render a better quality surface than a tablesaw time and time again. A better surface for looking at, or a better surface for glue adhesion? |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
TeamCasa wrote:
In a separate thread, a discussion has evolved to discussing the difference between the quality of a surface prepared by a jointer and that of a rip from a tablesaw. I believe that if all of the equipment is setup properly, all blades are quality ones, sharp and the procedures are sound, a jointer will still render a better quality surface than a tablesaw time and time again. Thoughts? Intuitively, it feels like the jointer should win even in the best conditions for the tablesaw. Each cut of the jointer is done by one blade which is a straight line moving to form a cylinder. You now concatenate very close cylinder surfaces, so the finish should be very smooth. With the tablesaw, you achieve the cut plane surface by concatenating parallel circular lines -- if you move the wood too fast, it would tend to form grooves (you would have a surface akin to an old vinyl record -- an LP). If you move it slowly, it's better, but it still sounds like the surface should be more irregular than in the other case. I'm no expert, BTW, but this is what my intuition tells me. Carlos -- |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
On Mon, 18 Oct 2004 14:20:52 -0700, TeamCasa wrote:
In a separate thread, a discussion has evolved to discussing the difference between the quality of a surface prepared by a jointer and that of a rip from a tablesaw. I believe that if all of the equipment is setup properly, all blades are quality ones, sharp and the procedures are sound, a jointer will still render a better quality surface than a tablesaw time and time again. Thoughts? Dave I've been using my Searz RAS for glue up ripping red oak. Can't feel any blade marks and can hardly find any with a bright light and a magnifying glass. -- "It has been a source of great pain to me to have met with so many among [my] opponents who had not the liberality to distinguish between political and social opposition; who transferred at once to the person, the hatred they bore to his political opinions." --Thomas Jefferson |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
TeamCasa wrote:
I believe that if all of the equipment is setup properly, all blades are quality ones, sharp and the procedures are sound, a jointer will still render a better quality surface than a tablesaw time and time again. Thoughts? In theory yes but I can usually count on some tear out with the jointer whereas the table saw delivers me a glue ready edge without tear out. UA100 |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
there are several models of glueline ripsaws in the commercial field the most
prevalent being the deihls, these critters achieve a cut line that will rival jointers and have been around for a lot of years but they depend on the feed systems to make them that accurate most people use their fence to joint with and it relies on the opposite edge of the board. there are power feed units for the medium and large shop model table saws but the can't match the length and grip of a feed chain. other major considerations are the rigidity of the blade and mounts, just an observation from a diehl 52 owner |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
On 18 Oct 2004 18:25:59 -0400, DJ Delorie wrote:
"TeamCasa" writes: I believe that if all of the equipment is setup properly, all blades are quality ones, sharp and the procedures are sound, a jointer will still render a better quality surface than a tablesaw time and time again. A better surface for looking at, or a better surface for glue adhesion? used properly either tool can produce a surface siutable for glue adhesion as well as a surface with whatever tool marks there are small enough to escape the unaided eye. if you're getting out the magnifying glass all bets are off. a well tuned table saw with a good quality sharp blade is a joy to work with.... |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
On Mon, 18 Oct 2004 18:41:11 -0400, Carlos Moreno
wrote: TeamCasa wrote: In a separate thread, a discussion has evolved to discussing the difference between the quality of a surface prepared by a jointer and that of a rip from a tablesaw. I believe that if all of the equipment is setup properly, all blades are quality ones, sharp and the procedures are sound, a jointer will still render a better quality surface than a tablesaw time and time again. Thoughts? Intuitively, it feels like the jointer should win even in the best conditions for the tablesaw. Each cut of the jointer is done by one blade which is a straight line moving to form a cylinder. You now concatenate very close cylinder surfaces, so the finish should be very smooth. With the tablesaw, you achieve the cut plane surface by concatenating parallel circular lines -- if you move the wood too fast, it would tend to form grooves (you would have a surface akin to an old vinyl record -- an LP). If you move it slowly, it's better, but it still sounds like the surface should be more irregular than in the other case. I'm no expert, BTW, but this is what my intuition tells me. Carlos depends on the tooth pattern. a saw blade made for finish cuts has big teeth with fairly long faces. the edge of the faces is a cutting surface which overlaps the cutting surface of the previous tooth. it's not just cutting at the tips..... |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
On Mon, 18 Oct 2004 23:17:13 GMT, Unisaw A100
wrote: TeamCasa wrote: I believe that if all of the equipment is setup properly, all blades are quality ones, sharp and the procedures are sound, a jointer will still render a better quality surface than a tablesaw time and time again. Thoughts? I think the Freud crosscut blade makes a damn fine cut, and I don't imagine the rip blade is inferior in any way. I would think the answer would depend on how nice a jointer you were using, but after a certain point, I doubt it matters much- they're both excellent. In theory yes but I can usually count on some tear out with the jointer whereas the table saw delivers me a glue ready edge without tear out. UA100 |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Interesting reading...whereas I religiously make a habit of ripping wide and
then truing-up on the jointer, it now occurs to me that the little fuzzy surface on the saw-cut may actually provide for a better glue-up than the jointer produced glass surface. Will have to experiment. "Prometheus" wrote in message ... On Mon, 18 Oct 2004 23:17:13 GMT, Unisaw A100 wrote: TeamCasa wrote: I believe that if all of the equipment is setup properly, all blades are quality ones, sharp and the procedures are sound, a jointer will still render a better quality surface than a tablesaw time and time again. Thoughts? I think the Freud crosscut blade makes a damn fine cut, and I don't imagine the rip blade is inferior in any way. I would think the answer would depend on how nice a jointer you were using, but after a certain point, I doubt it matters much- they're both excellent. In theory yes but I can usually count on some tear out with the jointer whereas the table saw delivers me a glue ready edge without tear out. UA100 |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
"TeamCasa" wrote in message ... In a separate thread, a discussion has evolved to discussing the difference between the quality of a surface prepared by a jointer and that of a rip from a tablesaw. I believe that if all of the equipment is setup properly, all blades are quality ones, sharp and the procedures are sound, a jointer will still render a better quality surface than a tablesaw time and time again. I think it all depends on the quality of the equipment and the user technique. So far I have never been able to get my jointer to leave a shiny reflective surface on the edge of a board. I see this regularly with my TS. And yes, this is along the ripped edge. |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Nope.
"TeamCasa" wrote in message ... In a separate thread, a discussion has evolved to discussing the difference between the quality of a surface prepared by a jointer and that of a rip from a tablesaw. I believe that if all of the equipment is setup properly, all blades are quality ones, sharp and the procedures are sound, a jointer will still render a better quality surface than a tablesaw time and time again. Thoughts? Dave |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
I have been cutting glueable edges with my table saw for years. Mainly
because, until now, I have not had a decent jointer. It takes a good blade and a deliberate, smooth feed through the blade. Quite often, I ended up making more than one pass to get a good edge. Occasionally I ended up sweeping a lot of the "glueable edge" off the floor before I got there. Tomorrow morning I'll finish setting up my new Powermatic 54A. It should be better than the 50 year old Craftsman 4" it replaced. |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
TeamCasa did say:
In a separate thread, a discussion has evolved to discussing the difference between the quality of a surface prepared by a jointer and that of a rip from a tablesaw. I believe that if all of the equipment is setup properly, all blades are quality ones, sharp and the procedures are sound, a jointer will still render a better quality surface than a tablesaw time and time again. Thoughts? Dave Setup?? Procedures?? Sharpness?? BAH!!! The tool with the most power is the best option. Always. HP beats sharpness any day of the week. Maximum current draw = maximum woodworking happiness. -- New project = new tool. Hard and fast rule. |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
"Tom Kohlman" wrote in message
Interesting reading...whereas I religiously make a habit of ripping wide and then truing-up on the jointer, it now occurs to me that the little fuzzy surface on the saw-cut may actually provide for a better glue-up than the jointer produced glass surface.. IIRC, most modern glue manufacturers will advise you that a rough surface is of no benefit whatsoever. -- www.e-woodshop.net Last update: 10/04/04 |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
On Mon, 18 Oct 2004 14:20:52 -0700, "TeamCasa"
wrote: In a separate thread, a discussion has evolved to discussing the difference between the quality of a surface prepared by a jointer and that of a rip from a tablesaw. I believe that if all of the equipment is setup properly, all blades are quality ones, sharp and the procedures are sound, a jointer will still render a better quality surface than a tablesaw time and time again. Thoughts? Why certainly, Dave, of _course_ I have thoughts.... The foremost one being: Isn't it a bit odd that no one has yet defined-- in this or the previous thread-- what is _exactly_ meant by the phrase "prepared" surface? Are they (you) referring to the actual glued surfaces OR the _glue_line_ that will be visible on the (say) tabletop _after_ glue-up? If it's the former, there is no difference between the two in any _real_ sense. You could rip a board with a handsaw, true it up by holding both boards together and rubbing the edges on the sidewalk and get a glued joint that would hold up longer under stress than the surrounding wood. So from that perspective, it's a draw. Either properly setup machine will outperform the necessary requirements for a successful result. Of course, the glue line will _look_ like ****, but... If it's the latter, and it's an almost invisible glue line that you're after, then there is no discernable difference between the two either. Given properly set up equipment of either type, once the boards have been glued, the "scallops" (man, that's going some, ain't it?) that are left by the jointer are too small to be seen and the edge left by a great blade in a good saw is going to be... perfect. So from that perspective it's a draw, too. I've done both. Darned if I can tell the difference. So; Either case, it's a draw. Can we get back to sumpin' important now, like how much Kerry sucks? (I just threw that in 'cause Charlie's reading this thread.) Once again, passionate woodworkers pondering questions one would expect to see only on the rec.rolex.escapements.precision.machining newsgroup.(1) God, I _love_ this place. It's full of people even more anal than I am. ; Michael Baglio (1) Yeah, I made that up. |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Time and time again? Nope, don't agree. Many times I get an edge I
can't improve upon off the saw. Sometimes not. The "improved" edge I get off the jointer is no better than the really good ones I get off the saw. bob g. TeamCasa wrote: In a separate thread, a discussion has evolved to discussing the difference between the quality of a surface prepared by a jointer and that of a rip from a tablesaw. I believe that if all of the equipment is setup properly, all blades are quality ones, sharp and the procedures are sound, a jointer will still render a better quality surface than a tablesaw time and time again. Thoughts? Dave |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Even though you may believe that the jointer will win over the table
saw, you also say that if all things are quality, the jointer will be the best cut still. Well, I have made cuts with my forest blades both on my CMS and table saw and have been told that the wood I cut was sanded with a 220 grit sandpaper. After you have purchased a forest blade, you will wonder why you have a jointer other than to put a straight edge on rough lumber that you want to run through your table saw to get two parallel sides that both look like they have has a 220 grit sandpaper on. Suggestion: get yourself s forest blade for your table saw and then ask yourself this question. TeamCasa wrote In a separate thread, a discussion has evolved to discussing the difference between the quality of a surface prepared by a jointer and that of a rip from a tablesaw. I believe that if all of the equipment is setup properly, all blades are quality ones, sharp and the procedures are sound, a jointer will still render a better quality surface than a tablesaw time and time again. Thoughts? Dave -- Woody Check out my Web Page at: http://community-1.webtv.net/Woodwor...workerJoesInfo Where you will find: ******** How My Shop Works ******** 5-21-03 * * * Build a $20 DC Separator Can Lid. 1-14-03 * * * DC Relay Box Building Plans. 1-14-03 * * * The Bad Air Your Breath Everyday.1-14-03 * * * What is a Real Woodworker? 2-8-03 * * * Murphy's Woodworking Definitions. 2-8-03 * * * Murphy's Woodworking Laws. 4-6-03 * * * What is the true meaning of life? 1-14-03 * * * Woodworker Shop Signs. 2-8-03 |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
|
#21
|
|||
|
|||
"Joe "Woody" Woodpecker" wrote in message ... Even though you may believe that the jointer will win over the table saw, you also say that if all things are quality, the jointer will be the best cut still. Well, I have made cuts with my forest blades both on my CMS and table saw and have been told that the wood I cut was sanded with a 220 grit sandpaper. After you have purchased a forest blade, you will wonder why you have a jointer other than to put a straight edge on rough lumber that you want to run through your table saw to get two parallel sides that both look like they have has a 220 grit sandpaper on. Suggestion: get yourself s forest blade for your table saw and then ask yourself this question. All right. Enough. I almost surrender. As I've said in another thread, I've never seen the need to own a Forrest blade or any other "name" blade. Always found the lesser blade to be sufficient. But... I just keep hearing - well, reading about these named blades, so I have to ask. Just exactly what are you guys seeing when you go to these blades that I'm missing out on? I've gotten great life out of my blades over time, I get cuts that I have considered to be excellent - as I said, I can often glue up right off the saw. Sometimes I do have to hand plane an edge but that seems to be more because I fed the board inconsistently. All things are relative though. Great life, good edges, etc. are all compared to what would result from, oh say... breaking the board over one's knee. My table saw certainly provides a nicer edge than that would. More specifically, what have you guys seen or been impressed with when you went from a blade you were very please with to a Forrest or another named blade? -- -Mike- |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
On Tue, 19 Oct 2004 10:03:50 GMT, "Mike Marlow"
wrote: More specifically, what have you guys seen or been impressed with when you went from a blade you were very please with to a Forrest or another named blade? In my experience a Freud, better DeWalt, etc... ($50-$60), and a Forrest, Systematic, or other "pro shop" blade ($100+), all start out cutting very nicely. A few hours of cutting later is when the difference becomes apparent. The $50 blade is still cutting OK, the better blade is still sweeeet! Sometimes, all it takes is one very difficult board to show the difference. Woods that are prone to chip out or burning can magnify the difference. I actually lived in the same camp as you, until I finally broke down and bought a WWII. FWIW, my local fine woodworking school prefers Systematic and Ridge Carbide blades over Forrest, and he's got them all. Barry |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
Barry responds:
More specifically, what have you guys seen or been impressed with when you went from a blade you were very please with to a Forrest or another named blade? In my experience a Freud, better DeWalt, etc... ($50-$60), and a Forrest, Systematic, or other "pro shop" blade ($100+), all start out cutting very nicely. A few hours of cutting later is when the difference becomes apparent. The $50 blade is still cutting OK, the better blade is still sweeeet! Sometimes, all it takes is one very difficult board to show the difference. Woods that are prone to chip out or burning can magnify the difference. I actually lived in the same camp as you, until I finally broke down and bought a WWII. FWIW, my local fine woodworking school prefers Systematic and Ridge Carbide blades over Forrest, and he's got them all. My experience, too, but with Freud 410 blades instead of Forrest. Anyone looking for SystiMatic blades: I wish you better luck than I had. They seem to have been bought by Simonds and turned into a sawmill brand with replaceable teeth. Charlie Self "There are two ways of exerting one's strength: one is pushing down, the other is pulling up." Booker T. Washington |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
Couple of thoughts:
The jointer, or at least all those I have seen (I wonder if this will be one of those why-didn't-I-think-of-that innovations a few years down the road) has knives that cut perpindicular to the grain, with no shear at all. Depending on the pattern, saw blades can have at least a little shear, which should make for a cleaner cut. Sawblades are usually carbide, jointer knives usually steel. The steel knives can be sharper at the outset, but will get dull quickly and then not be as clean. Usually, the saw blade is going right through the wood, possibly flexing slightly and marring the cut. I usually have my jointer set to a depth of 1/64" or less - at that depth, there is never any tearout, and even with old knives I get a very clean edge. Unisaw A100 wrote in message . .. TeamCasa wrote: I believe that if all of the equipment is setup properly, all blades are quality ones, sharp and the procedures are sound, a jointer will still render a better quality surface than a tablesaw time and time again. Thoughts? In theory yes but I can usually count on some tear out with the jointer whereas the table saw delivers me a glue ready edge without tear out. UA100 |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
wrote in message used properly either tool can produce a surface siutable for glue adhesion as well as a surface with whatever tool marks there are small enough to escape the unaided eye. if you're getting out the magnifying glass all bets are off. a well tuned table saw with a good quality sharp blade is a joy to work with.... Agreed. Dave |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
A Diehl is usally not considered a machine sutiable for small shops. I have
used one many times. There is simply no subsitute for HP (The one I used had 18" blade with 20hp!) and a power feeder. Dave "Madeuce50bmg" wrote in message ... there are several models of glueline ripsaws in the commercial field the most prevalent being the deihls, these critters achieve a cut line that will rival jointers and have been around for a lot of years but they depend on the feed systems to make them that accurate most people use their fence to joint with and it relies on the opposite edge of the board. there are power feed units for the medium and large shop model table saws but the can't match the length and grip of a feed chain. other major considerations are the rigidity of the blade and mounts, just an observation from a diehl 52 owner |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
Leon said,
I think it all depends on the quality of the equipment and the user technique. So far I have never been able to get my jointer to leave a shiny reflective surface on the edge of a board. I see this regularly with my TS. And yes, this is along the ripped edge. If you are unable to get your jointer to improve the edge and the edge is as Leon describes, why bother. However, my point is, when the situation, wood condition and other factors leave the edge unsutiable after ripping, a jointer will solve the problem. Dave |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
I'm sure you will enjoy the 54A. It is a very good machine and like any
other essential tool, once you have one, you can not imagine how you managed before! Dave "RonB" wrote in message news:%ZZcd.5628$EZ.2583@okepread07... I have been cutting glueable edges with my table saw for years. Mainly because, until now, I have not had a decent jointer. It takes a good blade and a deliberate, smooth feed through the blade. Quite often, I ended up making more than one pass to get a good edge. Occasionally I ended up sweeping a lot of the "glueable edge" off the floor before I got there. Tomorrow morning I'll finish setting up my new Powermatic 54A. It should be better than the 50 year old Craftsman 4" it replaced. |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
Joe,
I do have several Forrest blades and they perform very well. I am after-all an un-repentant tool junkie. I also have other very high quality blades that out perform the Forrest. (Relax everyone, the differences are very small and not worth describing in this thread.) My point was, not whether a table saw could in some cases, produce an edge that was as good as a jointer, but that time and time again, a jointer will consistantly produce a better quality surface. For glue-ups, the table saw can produce in most cases, produce a sutiable edge. What about the wood that decides not to cooperate? Dave "Joe "Woody" Woodpecker" wrote in message ... Even though you may believe that the jointer will win over the table saw, you also say that if all things are quality, the jointer will be the best cut still. Well, I have made cuts with my forest blades both on my CMS and table saw and have been told that the wood I cut was sanded with a 220 grit sandpaper. After you have purchased a forest blade, you will wonder why you have a jointer other than to put a straight edge on rough lumber that you want to run through your table saw to get two parallel sides that both look like they have has a 220 grit sandpaper on. Suggestion: get yourself s forest blade for your table saw and then ask yourself this question. TeamCasa wrote In a separate thread, a discussion has evolved to discussing the difference between the quality of a surface prepared by a jointer and that of a rip from a tablesaw. I believe that if all of the equipment is setup properly, all blades are quality ones, sharp and the procedures are sound, a jointer will still render a better quality surface than a tablesaw time and time again. Thoughts? Dave -- Woody Check out my Web Page at: http://community-1.webtv.net/Woodwor...workerJoesInfo Where you will find: ******** How My Shop Works ******** 5-21-03 * * * Build a $20 DC Separator Can Lid. 1-14-03 * * * DC Relay Box Building Plans. 1-14-03 * * * The Bad Air Your Breath Everyday.1-14-03 * * * What is a Real Woodworker? 2-8-03 * * * Murphy's Woodworking Definitions. 2-8-03 * * * Murphy's Woodworking Laws. 4-6-03 * * * What is the true meaning of life? 1-14-03 * * * Woodworker Shop Signs. 2-8-03 |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
Alex Feldman wrote:
The jointer, or at least all those I have seen (I wonder if this will be one of those why-didn't-I-think-of-that innovations a few years down the road) has knives that cut perpindicular to the grain, with no shear at all. Depending on the pattern, saw blades can have at least a little shear, which should make for a cleaner cut. There's a company, the name of which escapes me, that sells jointer heads that use carbide inserts. The inserts are set so that they cut the wood at an angle to the grain. No, I'm not talking about Grizzly. -Peter |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
"TeamCasa" wrote in message
I'm sure you will enjoy the 54A. It is a very good machine and like any other essential tool, once you have one, you can not imagine how you managed before! Agreed ... often wonder how/why I did without my 54A. Milling rough stock is just a fraction of its duty. -- www.e-woodshop.net Last update: 10/04/04 |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
On Mon, 18 Oct 2004 14:20:52 -0700, "TeamCasa"
wrote: In a separate thread, a discussion has evolved to discussing the difference between the quality of a surface prepared by a jointer and that of a rip from a tablesaw. I believe that if all of the equipment is setup properly, all blades are quality ones, sharp and the procedures are sound, a jointer will still render a better quality surface than a tablesaw time and time again. Thoughts? Dave My uneducated guess would be that if you could get that good of a square edge on a good table saw, the guys that do quality work all have jointers that they're wasting time with... Every web page that I've looked at relating to this and related groups, there is both a saw and jointer... (and a surface planer *sigh* *envy attack*) |
#33
|
|||
|
|||
On Mon, 18 Oct 2004 21:21:53 -0400, WoodMangler
wrote: TeamCasa did say: In a separate thread, a discussion has evolved to discussing the difference between the quality of a surface prepared by a jointer and that of a rip from a tablesaw. I believe that if all of the equipment is setup properly, all blades are quality ones, sharp and the procedures are sound, a jointer will still render a better quality surface than a tablesaw time and time again. Thoughts? Dave Setup?? Procedures?? Sharpness?? BAH!!! The tool with the most power is the best option. Always. HP beats sharpness any day of the week. Maximum current draw = maximum woodworking happiness. hmm... I have an old sears benchtop saw.... and an old chevy 327 in the shed... would about 400 horse power be enough? |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
"mac davis" wrote in message ... My uneducated guess would be that if you could get that good of a square edge on a good table saw, the guys that do quality work all have jointers that they're wasting time with... Huh... If you are infering that if a TS can produce an edge as clean as a jointer, the jointer is going to waste time, you are wrong. The jointer IS NOT supposed to be used to clean up TS cuts. A jointers primary purpose is to Straighten and Flatten Stock. If you are going from the TS to the jointer you are doing every thing backwards. |
#36
|
|||
|
|||
Bridger:
spiral cut jointers have been around for a long time. latest thing is indexed tooth cutter heads.... And don't forget the Uniplane. http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...tem=3842852358 UA100 |
#37
|
|||
|
|||
On Mon, 18 Oct 2004 14:20:52 -0700, "TeamCasa"
wrote: In a separate thread, a discussion has evolved to discussing the difference between the quality of a surface prepared by a jointer and that of a rip from a tablesaw. I believe that if all of the equipment is setup properly, all blades are quality ones, sharp and the procedures are sound, a jointer will still render a better quality surface than a tablesaw time and time again. Thoughts? Dave ==================== Whats to think about...your right ! Bob Griffiths |
#38
|
|||
|
|||
UA100 responds:
Bridger: spiral cut jointers have been around for a long time. latest thing is indexed tooth cutter heads.... And don't forget the Uniplane. http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...tem=3842852358 Scary tools. I note they don't show the cutterhead in the photos. I hadn't thought of one of these in probably 20 years. OK if used with almost excessive care, but it's easy to understand why Delta quit making them. Charlie Self "There are two ways of exerting one's strength: one is pushing down, the other is pulling up." Booker T. Washington |
#39
|
|||
|
|||
mac davis did say:
Maximum current draw = maximum woodworking happiness. hmm... I have an old sears benchtop saw.... and an old chevy 327 in the shed... would about 400 horse power be enough? Almost certainly. If there's any doubt whatsoever, N2O is always an option. -- New project = new tool. Hard and fast rule. |
#40
|
|||
|
|||
|
Reply |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Impressions/Review of Craftsman Professional Table Saw | Woodworking | |||
Ping Pong Table | Woodworking | |||
Worked on my grizzly jointer | Woodworking | |||
General International Table Saw Dimensions | Woodworking | |||
Quality table saw | Woodworking |