Re: Workbench top design (long)
Thom D
>By complexity I am mostly standing up for standard 2 vise workbench vs. all the no-vise benches. Or as mentioned if you are making a bench twice as wide as need be, and it is going to sit in the middle of your workspace, then you could have two more vises on the far side. My bench was designed for all around use though unfortunately space requires that it sit against the wall. The concept was western planing on one side, Japanese planing on the other, courtesy of the Veritas double screw vise that works on both side of one end, and I have a single Tucker vise on one side. The tucker vise is almost enough by itself, and gets far more use by itself than any other part of the bench.
I had originally made a bench like the Klaus one so I already had experience with that kind of bench, which is excelent.
"I myself am fascinated by complcated projects, may that be an advantage or a weakness. As to the variety of tools, however, I may be less concerned. First, I won't have enough money to buy much more than I already did, second, I can't stand loud noise (I'm a musician), so I won't be friends with machines. But I do have a bycicle (even an extremly good one), and the idea to use my workbench to fix it didn't occur me so far ... Ok, I'm joking here."
For me whether it is complexity or simplicity it needs to be "earned". Over-complex design or over-simple is amateurish. It's probably impossible to nail it perfectly, but the result needs to speak of real need or it becomes a sort of mechanical clutter. I do think the average modern amateur or professional has very difficult needs. In the guild days a worker often made very specific parts, but I make everything that strikes my fancy from canoe paddles to cabinetry, from boats to guitars. This makes heavy demands on my bench, but I find I can solve them with a relatively simple bench that has two vises.
Even non-power woodworking can be pretty noisy, hammering in particular. It's not my favorite kind of hammer for chiseling, but I started using the rubber carving mallet just because it is so much quieter on the ears.
"Now, to your comments about my bench. I'm not that sure about an Emmert or Verities Tucker vise, because I'm not into scarving or working on oddly shaped wood."
Neither am I particularly, I have never unscrewed my Tucker jaws so they will hold angled wood, and I have had mine for 10-15 years. On the other hand I was carving a handle for my broad axe last night, so while I am not a carver flexible vises are an asset.
What is really valuably able the tucker is:
- Instant sizing from really wide to closed by means of one of two levers.
-Rotation, this allow you to use your body more efficiently by finding the perfect angle
-90 degree placement allow one to hold drawer sides, etc... in the vertical position without interference with the screw. also raises jaw height a little which is often useful
-90 so the jaws are flat with the top a very useful position for all kinds of work I probably use it 30% of the time in this position, whether cutting tenons or profiling edges. It's also a super useful position for attaching other workboards. Good position for Japanese sawing dovetails.
Tucker is expensive and I bought it more or less thinking I might return it, but it is the most useful holding tool I have. On the other hand if it was taken away I would still get by, but one can say that about just about anything no mater how useful.
"There is no doubt these are the greatest, most versatile vises, but I can't just see why spend so much money in addition to everything else."
It's personal, but I would cut out 4 of your vises if it helped with financing a Tucker. Obviously if you can make yours out of raw wood that is a lot cheaper still..
"Believe me, I thought hard about a Tucker vise, because it's very tempting. Ok, tell you what, if I really have to give up (nearly) all my cherished ideas because I finally understand that they were crap, then I'm going to reconsider the Tucker vise. By the way, you can do something similar also with a wooden screw. In Landis or Schleining there is a photo somewhere with a front vise attached to a bench by a hinge ..."
Way more useful than just the fact it is hinged, though that would help.
"So you don't like my U-formed tail vise either ! If I get you right, you consider "lots of useable rugged space along the edge of the bench" lost because you imply that one cannot work on the horizontal tail vise parts of may drawing."
a bunch of issues:
- you have a wide rear vise operated by two screws, and you have 90 degree tracked elements on the tail configuration, so it is either pretty loose or going to be prone to binding.
- I don't see the advantage to the tail elements. A tail vise can provide a really strong vise area for stuff like tenons, but 2 of them? I'd rather have more supported appron/edge.
- it takes away a lot of stable edge from the bench, but that was mostly in connection with your top vise where the whole structure of the edge of the bench has been cut up, would be difficult to keep level and would need like 4 trestles creating a lot of underbench clutter.
- If the table top expands how do the two vises adapt to the widening in the top without further binding or loss of strength it would work if your bench top was all laminated like plywood, but not with a solid top without a ton of complex joinery, probably weak.
"Well, I was told that hammering on them is indeed out of the question, but planing should be possible nevertheless ?"
I think you will have quite a time keeping the top edge in plane, and with all the doodads flattening the grain running in all those directions will be a pill.
" And I'm sorry, but I didn't understand your sentence "I would install the double style on 2/3rds of the bench and the standard tail vise on the other third". Could you give me a drawing of that ? I'm really interested."
I'll do a scalled drawing on 35"x 96" for you. look at the bottom.
"I agree that my 'integrated" front vise is not qualified for panel joinery like dovetails, but it should be for fixing little furniture ? Or what did you mean by "casework" ? "
Cutting dovetails for the cases of cabinets, you need to be able to secure a wide board vertically. If you want to grab a piece of furniture you can get a lot in the Tucker.
"The frame of my bench is intended without glue at the back end, so the wood should be able to move. And I don't understand why dogholes in corners may have "minimal strength" ? Do you refer to the possibility of breaking out, due to a lack of wood at the corners ?"
Well I assume you know what you are doing and have something in mind relative to running the dark strips, like a picture frame around the bench. But depending on how it is done it will restrict movement or blow out. Often the corners are the breadboards if they are designed to move, and those elements are strong, but not strong as the dogholes in line. If you have some corner dovetails or miters I don't see much place for dogholes. It is just a sketch so I'm guessing at some of what I am seeing.
"Ok about the "self-inflicted wound", that's a good expression for my integrated vise :-) And last but not least, I'll think about your idea of a bench with two different heights. That may be I could like. :-) "
Well the thing is two benches probably make more sense but that robs the bench of "supper bench" attributes, so integrating it into one tells a more powerful story.
I feel I need a low bench for power work or really large pieces, and a high bench for detail stuff, narrow pieces and so forth. I really like the idea of bench that raises and lowers, except I really like benches to be all wood. I don't want my bench to suggest metal furniture or other products are actually better. I prefer a wood vise to a tucker on those grounds. However... I think there is something to be said for the Noden Adjustabench if it works as they say it does.
Have fun.
