From all of the discussions here and from my review of the $$ one can spend
for a router lift, it seems clear that the precision of the height
adjustment can be very important. To better than 0.01". I've also seen
the $$ that can be spent for a router table fence, e.g. Incra. However, I
have also seen some fences for sale that have no more than jig screws/knobs
in T-tracks. And the same type is used on "ultimate" tables. This
_suggests_ that setting the fence is not so critical -- or, it is much
easier to set without a micro-adjust mechanism. Even on the small-shop
shapers, the fence seems to be a t-track set-up.

Of course, some bits use bearings, so that seems to solve a problem with
them. And other bits seem to involve setting part of the bit in line with
the fence - so a straight edge might make that easy.

I am planning on using a locking miter box bit, and there both height and
fence setting do seem critical.

So, before I set out to build my table for my new Bosch router, I'd
appreciate some insights on router table fence precision -- both "up and
back" setting as well as keeing it "square" -- i.e., parallel to a
diameter. I _can_ use my DW TS fence, but it would be better if I could use
a T-track fence effectively so that I can route, cut, route again, as
needed. TIA. -- Igor

"igor" wrote in message
So, before I set out to build my table for my new Bosch router, I'd
appreciate some insights on router table fence precision -- both "up and
back" setting as well as keeing it "square" -- i.e., parallel to a
diameter. I _can_ use my DW TS fence, but it would be better if I could
use
a T-track fence effectively so that I can route, cut, route again, as
needed. TIA. -- Igor

If you mean to a bit, a router fence doesn't have to be "square" or
"parallel to a diameter", unless your fence is curved, it always is
perpendicular to the diameter of the bit no matter how you position it ...
think about it.

IME, the biggest plus in a router fence (and setting bit height for that
matter) is not necessarily in the "precision" of the setting (that can
achieved by simply using a simple system like a ruler), but in the ability
to LOCK it down securely.

Be wary of those designs that rely on cheap plastic parts to _secure_ the
fence. Once you've ruined an expensive piece of wood because the fence
moved, you'll appreciate that fact more than ever.

--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 11/06/04

Igor,

I posted a pic of my router fence and lift combo in abpw for you to look at
and maybe consider building one yourself and save a bundle. The combination
is capable of repeatable tolerances of .001 if needed. I don't need that
kind of precision but the ability to dial in the cuts sure is nice.....

It is not a novice project to build and it will present some challenges -
looks are deceiving. Pat was selling these for around $400 last time I
looked. I also purchased the Jessem Rout-R-Lift when it first came out but
there have been numerous improvements from different manf so check them out.
The lift I have is solid and accurate so I have no need to look for another.

Bob S.


"igor" wrote in message
...
From all of the discussions here and from my review of the $$ one can
spend
for a router lift, it seems clear that the precision of the height
adjustment can be very important. To better than 0.01". I've also seen
the $$ that can be spent for a router table fence, e.g. Incra. However, I
have also seen some fences for sale that have no more than jig
screws/knobs
in T-tracks. And the same type is used on "ultimate" tables. This
_suggests_ that setting the fence is not so critical -- or, it is much
easier to set without a micro-adjust mechanism. Even on the small-shop
shapers, the fence seems to be a t-track set-up.

Of course, some bits use bearings, so that seems to solve a problem with
them. And other bits seem to involve setting part of the bit in line with
the fence - so a straight edge might make that easy.

I am planning on using a locking miter box bit, and there both height and
fence setting do seem critical.

So, before I set out to build my table for my new Bosch router, I'd
appreciate some insights on router table fence precision -- both "up and
back" setting as well as keeing it "square" -- i.e., parallel to a
diameter. I _can_ use my DW TS fence, but it would be better if I could
use
a T-track fence effectively so that I can route, cut, route again, as
needed. TIA. -- Igor

On Wed, 17 Nov 2004 14:41:27 GMT, igor wrote:
I've had 2 or 3 router tables and the one I use the most and keep
"coming back" to is basically a 4' wide table with a straight fence
made of 2 layers of 3/4 ply... cut out under the fence using largest
bit so I know it clears..
The only adjustment is that it's held to the table with 2 carriage
bolts set in slots in the underside of the table..
I find that the height of the bit is much more critical than the fence
setting.... and that the thinner the stock, the more critical the bit
height becomes..

From all of the discussions here and from my review of the $$ one can spend
for a router lift, it seems clear that the precision of the height
adjustment can be very important. To better than 0.01". I've also seen
the $$ that can be spent for a router table fence, e.g. Incra. However, I
have also seen some fences for sale that have no more than jig screws/knobs
in T-tracks. And the same type is used on "ultimate" tables. This
_suggests_ that setting the fence is not so critical -- or, it is much
easier to set without a micro-adjust mechanism. Even on the small-shop
shapers, the fence seems to be a t-track set-up.

Of course, some bits use bearings, so that seems to solve a problem with
them. And other bits seem to involve setting part of the bit in line with
the fence - so a straight edge might make that easy.

I am planning on using a locking miter box bit, and there both height and
fence setting do seem critical.

So, before I set out to build my table for my new Bosch router, I'd
appreciate some insights on router table fence precision -- both "up and
back" setting as well as keeing it "square" -- i.e., parallel to a
diameter. I _can_ use my DW TS fence, but it would be better if I could use
a T-track fence effectively so that I can route, cut, route again, as
needed. TIA. -- Igor

BobS wrote:

Igor,

I posted a pic of my router fence and lift combo in abpw...

Please forgive a newbie to rec.woodworking, but what's "abpw"?
I'm in the middle of building my first router table, and will be getting
started on the fence sometime in the next few weeks.

Thanks
Charlie

On Wed, 17 Nov 2004 09:02:18 -0600, "Swingman" wrote:


IME, the biggest plus in a router fence (and setting bit height for that
matter) is not necessarily in the "precision" of the setting (that can
achieved by simply using a simple system like a ruler), but in the ability
to LOCK it down securely.

I agree with Swingman that priority number one is rigidity of the
fence when it's locked. 'Precision' can be achieved with the right
setup procedure and a simple screw lock down (assuming the fence
doesn't move when you lock it down). The Incra system offers one
additional advantage that is important only for some applications:
Repeatable and precise incremental positioning of the fence. So if you
are routing finger or dovetail joints precisely spaced, for example,
Incra's mechanism allows you to quickly and confidently adjust to the
next position (assuming it is on 1/32 inch increments).

TWS

"Charlie Myers" wrote

BobS wrote:

Igor,

I posted a pic of my router fence and lift combo in abpw...

Please forgive a newbie to rec.woodworking, but what's "abpw"?

alt.binaries.pictures.woodworking

It is a newsgroup that allows pictures.

"igor" wrote in message
...


in T-tracks. And the same type is used on "ultimate" tables. This
_suggests_ that setting the fence is not so critical -- or, it is much

As others have pointed out - the fence need only be flat since it's
tangential to the bit. If the fence is tall, then it should be
perpendicular to the table.

I am planning on using a locking miter box bit, and there both height and
fence setting do seem critical.

Yeah - but within reason. I see no need to define critical as "0.0000001in."

diameter. I _can_ use my DW TS fence, but it would be better if I could
use
a T-track fence effectively so that I can route, cut, route again, as

I used an 3/4" MDF "aux fence" that slid ontop of my table saw fence. Flat
and perpendicular. I liked it very much. The only thing that annoyed me as
dust collection - there wasn't any.

So, I just finished up the fence that's described in last month's Wood
magazine. It think it's a small step up, the dust collection now works very
well, but its not as easy to use as my old MDF one that just slipped onto
the TS fence.

On Wed, 17 Nov 2004 14:41:27 GMT, igor wrote:

I've also seen the $$ that can be spent for a router table fence, e.g. Incra.

Those were some of my wasted $$ 8-(

However, I
have also seen some fences for sale that have no more than jig screws/knobs
in T-tracks.

A fallacy in fences is that they have to slide. A swing is _much_
easier to arrange, and just as good.

There are different sorts of "accuracy"; precision, accuracy and
repeatability. For physical guides such as fences, we can also add
rigidity. As a user interface question, there's also adjustability.

Precision is the size of the calibrations. It's a good thing if
they're actually in the positions they claim, but that's not what's
measured by precision.

Accuracy is the question of whether the calibrations are really where
they claim. As most fences are uncalibrated, this is simply
irrelevant.

Repeatability is again only a matter for a calibrated fence. It's the
question of whether the same labelled position is in the same place,
no matter whether this is accurate or not.

Most fence designs are uncalibrated and continuously adjustable. This
renders all three accuracy measures somewhat irrelevant. We manage
because the (should) have good adjustability and most craft
woodworking is a one-off process. By "sneaking up on" a measurement,
we can get a cut where we want it. Of course, to cut another piece
the next day (after the fence has been used for other things), we'd
have to re-make the same set-up process from scratch. There is no
repeatability.

The first Incra jig was notable for it's _lack_ of precision. It used
a pair of meshing plastic racks and could only be adjusted in 1/32"
steps. In contrast it had good accuracy (between steps) and was
notably good for repeatability.

The current Incra tries to solve the precision problem by using a
micro-adjust knob. This allows infinitessimal adjustment and fine
precision. Unfortunately the clamp mechanism is such that
adjustability is very poor - the fence is simply not in the right
place whilst the clamp is released for adjustment.

Another downside to the Incra (very much IMHO) is that it's just not
rigid enough. I don't care how accurate the datum mark movement is, if
the ends of the fence can wobble.


So all this leaves us with two sorts of fence. Make yourself an
L-girder of MDF and hinge one end. That's a simple and easy to build
fence that has good adjustabilty within its precision, and can have
plenty of rigidity. If you want more precision, add a horizontal
adjusting screw and even a dial gauge, so that you can adjust a small
range without slackening the main clamp.

If, OTOH, you're doing repeated box making or dovetailing, the Incra
approach is good. It gives you the repeatability and best of all the
speed of adjustment that you need. You may not need accuracy to a
datum at all (the box parts are cut to match themselves, not some
external standard) and the accuracy between cuts is superb. Provided
that you use imperial dimensions and not metric, the 1/32" precision
is adequate.

I wouldn't buy an Incra again. Too flexible for the cost. If I was
doing a lot of finger jointing in this way, I might well make a simiar
fence myself, with some form of rack-positioning (probably 1/16" or
1/8" spacing).

--
Smert' spamionam

On Thu, 18 Nov 2004 03:31:49 +0000, Andy Dingley
wrote:

On Wed, 17 Nov 2004 14:41:27 GMT, igor wrote:

I've also seen the $$ that can be spent for a router table fence, e.g. Incra.

Those were some of my wasted $$ 8-(

However, I
have also seen some fences for sale that have no more than jig screws/knobs
in T-tracks.

A fallacy in fences is that they have to slide. A swing is _much_
easier to arrange, and just as good.

I can see that, now that you mention it, except perhaps if one is using a
miter gauge in a table slot, it would seem.

There are different sorts of "accuracy"; precision, accuracy and
repeatability. For physical guides such as fences, we can also add
rigidity. As a user interface question, there's also adjustability.

Precision is the size of the calibrations. It's a good thing if
they're actually in the positions they claim, but that's not what's
measured by precision.

Accuracy is the question of whether the calibrations are really where
they claim. As most fences are uncalibrated, this is simply
irrelevant.

Repeatability is again only a matter for a calibrated fence. It's the
question of whether the same labelled position is in the same place,
no matter whether this is accurate or not.

[snipped for length]

Wow. Thanks for all that. I've read through your post twice and will read
it again. I appreciate both the "academic" points as well as the
practical. Very helpful. -- Igor

On Thu, 18 Nov 2004 03:31:49 +0000, Andy Dingley
wrote:

snip

So all this leaves us with two sorts of fence. Make yourself an
L-girder of MDF and hinge one end. That's a simple and easy to build
fence that has good adjustabilty within its precision, and can have
plenty of rigidity. If you want more precision, add a horizontal
adjusting screw and even a dial gauge, so that you can adjust a small
range without slackening the main clamp.

Andy, as always a fine post.

I would add one comment about the swing type of fence. If the router
bit is positioned half-way between the pivot point and the measure
point then you get a 2X gain in measurement resolution. If you swing
the fence 1/32 of an inch at the measurement point it adjusts the
depth of the cut 1/64. This is the poor man's micro adjustment.

TWS