I was aware of the width problem potential you talk about and addressed it when I beveled the other side. What I did after beveling the first edge on all 4 assemblies was set up the fence on the other side of the bit and at a distance equal to the overall width of the part. I staged all 4 assemblies individually to make sure that I was going to be removing material from each. This way here, after I cut the 2nd side, all 4 assemblies are the exact same width. Procedurally, this may not have been the correct way to do it's all I could think of. Comments welcome for sure!! In following the 'directions' they just say 'We beveled the edges on a router table'. Simple nuff, eh? Ya, right!!mark-b wrote:If you try to run a bevel, the edge opposite the edge you are beveling should be against a fence or stop to insure that the parts are all the same size. If the parts vary in size, your corners will never mate correctly. Perhaps if you made a sled that your panels could fit under, you will get better results. Sometimes I feed wood with the router instead of into the router to eliminate tearing. Be warned that the router will want to get traction and spit the part out and pull your fingers in!
In your first sentence, are you saying that on the first edge bevel, you reference the opposite side against the fence? If so, I initially was going to do it that way but knew that method would introduce error in my bevel due to any squareness issue or overall width differences. I figured if I did my first bevel referencing the same edge being beveled that it would at least be parallel along the entire length and then that edge would be the reference for cutting the other side. Hard to explain so hopefully I'm clear.
Explain your sled process a little more. Would it hold all 4 assemblies nose to tail at the same time? Would it prevent the tear out I got? If so, how?
(Now I know for sure you 'seasoned' guys have never done that before) 
