Parallel or not

Re: Parallel or not

Shakey

>Mine's been set out a couple thousandths for as long as I've had the TS. I always read that was the best route to go for the majority of cuts. Lessens chance of binding and .002 won't show up in cut.

Re: Parallel or not

Larry Marker in Alabama

>That's one of those questions that has adamant believers on both sides of the fence. (Oooh, I just had to say that!)

I have mine set as close to parallel as I can get it. With a good splitter, used faithfully EVERY time you do a rip cut, you should not ever get a kickback that a few thousands of dispalcement in the fence would have prevented. Further, if you ever want to move the fence to the other side of the blade, you have to readjust it. (That said, I have never felt the need to move the fence to the other side.)

Larry

Parallel

Hoa Dinh

>I try to set my rip fence as parallel as possible with the blade. This has been the way since I bought a Jesada CPG2000 probably 10 years ago. The instructions that came with the blade specifically said the rip fence had to be in parallel with the blade for best quality cuts. To me that makes sense so I never try the other way.

-- Hoa.

Doesn't matter...

RobV

>it will just cut a wider kerf if it's not parallel.

Re: Parallel or not

Tony - Memphis

>Yeah, this is one of those holy war things! I'm an engineer by day. My take is that nothing is perfect (sorry Norm), so I try to force the error in my favor. So, when I setup my fence, I force the error such that the fence goes away from the blade. We're only talking a few thou where I am measuring near the blade. I bet the fence moves that much just in use. So, its no big deal, but it makes me feel better knowing its not going to pinch...probably....hopefully!

Tony

Re: Parallel of coarse...

Rick L

>Parallel of coarse which would be within the .002" range plus or minus. I can't help but chuckle when some talks about toeing out a fence by 2 thousandths. Most fences have more than that in play. 1/64" would be more realistic and even that would be tighter than most folks could achieve.

I vote Parallel

Lee Schierer, McKean, PA

>I have my Beismeyer fence set as close to zero as I can get it. I set it up with a dial indicator and spent a lot of time getting it right. I also have on a few occassions used my fence to the left of the blade so it works on either side when set to zero.

In no event should the fence ever be closer to the blade at the back of the blade than it is to the front. This is a sure formula for burning or a kickback.

Lee

Re: Parallel or not

Ellis Walentine

>In my experience, you can set your fence parallel or skewed a little away from the blade if all you want to do is rip the wood and you aren't being too fussy about the smoothness of the cut. Skewing the fence invites skewing the workpiece, which means that the back teeth don't follow as accurately in the wake of the front teeth. This can result in more circular marks on the edge, or scorching if the blade is dull or dirty. Also, the blade is trying to rip straight but you are fighting it by trying to keep it running along the fence. This can increase feed resistance somewhat, though you probably wouldn't notice it.

A couple thousandths is within rounding error range of a typical fence, so I wouldn't bother even trying to set the fence with that small a skew.

My hunch is that the practice of skewing the fence originated a long time ago, when the wood they were ripping might not have been quite as dry or as well conditioned as it is today. A board with built-in stress tends to spread open as it's cut, and I think the common practice of skewing the fence was partly intended to give the wood some room to expand without binding the blade. Europeans in particular often use a partial fence that ends at the back of the blade to allow for this expansion.

Ellis Walentine, Host

Great explanation Ellis - tks

Brint K in Atlanta

>