Clock door joinery

Re: Clock door joinery

Pam Niedermayer - Austin, TX

>When I asked a similar question about cabinet doors a couple or three years ago, those in the know, including Stephen Thomas and Sir Wm, said the proper way to make a door was M&T. I've followed that advice.

Pam

Re: Clock door joinery

Warren in Lancaster,Pa

>I would want to lap the front of the rail over the rabbet. If you make the overlaid part a little thicker (say 1/8) than the rabbet is deep, you can make a small pocket in the stile to set it in so the rail will stay in place and be easier to glue. Alternatively you could make the back part of the rail a little longer than the distance between the stiles and make a corresponding notch in the stiles.

One more way

Warren in Lancaster,Pa

>I was thinking mortise and tenon was getting a little fussy for this joint what with the narrow stile and the overlay, but if you make the front face of the tenon 3/8 from the front like the rabbet depth and you make the mortises before rabbeting, you could make a short tenon and a tidy joint. The shoulders front and back will be different because of lapping over the stile rabbet.

Re: One more way

William Duffield, on the Cohansey

>The reasons I recommend the M&T are that the frame should have a very light appearance, while supporting a very heavy piece of glass. At least, glass is a lot heavier than a wooden panel. Other joints in solid wood are not as strong as an optimally sized M&T. They are just cheaper to manufacture. That is one reason that later clock case styles often have larger, heavier, clunkier frames than earlier ones.

If the style of the movement and case you are working towards were factory mass produced, then don't worry about it. Just join it like the original was joined. Another issue to consider is the age of the original you are reproducing. In the past, increased efficiencies in machined joinery techniques often outpaced advances in glues. (Maybe, that contributed to your having a movement but not a case :^) A lapped, mitered corner works a lot better with modern, flexible glues than it did with earlier glues that were not as flexible. Still, the miter on the face is likely to open a bit and show over the years, due to wood movement and glue creep, but at least creepy glue won't lose its grip.

A lot of what I offer is only "off the cuff" generalities, because you don't state the age or style of your clock.

Age and style

Jack Guzman from Maine

>The clock I'm building is based on some pictures I have of 1910 regulator style wall clocks.The mitered corners are part of the look I want.The examples I have gotten close to appear to be mass produced with poor,hardware reinforced joinery.I probably only saw the cheaper made versions.However,I want to reproduce the look but improve on the joinery. One I saw in a museum had nails in from the ends holding the rail in.

For this reason I'm going to be keeping the corners mitered.I'm thinking now that I'm going to proceed as if I was working with inferior glue(even though I'm not)and not depend on glue to hold my joints.Maybe a pegged spline in the corners.Pegged tenons on the rail.Maybe,but now I have ideas to work with.

Thanks Pam, Warren and William for your input. if anyones interested ,I'll post a picture of the result.---Jack