Shopsmith Forums

dusty wrote:Thank you. I found that to which you refer. I had to read it. The Adobe Reader search did not locate it. I must be expecting Adobe to do something that it does not do.

The Adobe Reader search feature will work in documents that were prepared originally with Text embedded, but it cannot work if the document was scanned as an image as the text there is just a photo of the text in that kind of PDF.

dusty wrote:Thank you. I found that to which you refer. I had to read it. The Adobe Reader search did not locate it. I must be expecting Adobe to do something that it does not do.

Ahem!

JPG wrote:

GEG wrote:Thanks for all the comments. You are correct, there is no scribe mark on the new gauge tool. However, with my situation, I would need to grind the flat on the tool to have the edge of the blade in the middle of the adjustment flat so that I could use it properly. Maybe my tie bar placement is a little off, I do not know. The new blades are only slightly wider at .760" than the originals, and they do not have a bevel on the back edge. I will try the dial indicator method as it seems to be the best option for now.

I hope you are not referring to a lack of taper with the 'new' blades. It is very slight so you may not recognize it.

All this talk of scribing the gauge. Not in my manual. Manual sez just barely touch the gauge as the cutter head is rotated, but does not say 'where'. The manual also refers to that gauge surface as an arc. Could later versions of the gauge be 'straight'?

Well, mine certainly is straight and so is the one in the manual. See the pictures and manual pages I posted earlier.

What is the date of your manual?

The one on Vintage Machinery is 1992 and mine is 1991 and they are both the same.

I think you are right in that at some point SS changed the gauge to a straight one.

jsburger wrote:

JPG wrote:

GEG wrote:Thanks for all the comments. You are correct, there is no scribe mark on the new gauge tool. However, with my situation, I would need to grind the flat on the tool to have the edge of the blade in the middle of the adjustment flat so that I could use it properly. Maybe my tie bar placement is a little off, I do not know. The new blades are only slightly wider at .760" than the originals, and they do not have a bevel on the back edge. I will try the dial indicator method as it seems to be the best option for now.

I hope you are not referring to a lack of taper with the 'new' blades. It is very slight so you may not recognize it.

All this talk of scribing the gauge. Not in my manual. Manual sez just barely touch the gauge as the cutter head is rotated, but does not say 'where'. The manual also refers to that gauge surface as an arc. Could later versions of the gauge be 'straight'?

Well, mine certainly is straight and so is the one in the manual. See the pictures and manual pages I posted earlier.

What is the date of your manual?

The one on Vintage Machinery is 1992 and mine is 1991 and they are both the same.

I think you are right in that at some point SS changed the gauge to a straight one.

1982

Will post a pix later of my gauge.

It is now 'later'.

Ahh. The gauges are certainly different. This one, with the arc, seems to me to be the better. However, the arc is a critical feature. It needs to be positioned and sized precisely. The other one, the one I have, seems more tolerant of differences between planers. The user is responsible for marking the location of the gauge. Mine works well. I hope that the other style works as well.

Wish I had both so that I could do a comparison of results.

dusty wrote:Ahh. The gauges are certainly different. This one, with the arc, seems to me to be the better. However, the arc is a critical feature. It needs to be positioned and sized precisely. The other one, the one I have, seems more tolerant of differences between planers. The user is responsible for marking the location of the gauge. Mine works well. I hope that the other style works as well.

Wish I had both so that I could do a comparison of results.

With the arc, the rotational angle of the cutter becomes moot whereas that angle is critical with the straight one(rotate to the scribe line).

However the arc was a sheared edge and as such was rough(high/lo spots) initially. Gentle abrading removed the high spots. The arc allows rocking the cutter head while raising the blades rather than 'measure'/retract/raise/repeat. Also eliminates any parallax.

Again, what matters most is the same height across each blade and all three blades the same.

Very cool that we can collaborate and see the subtle variations.

To make the blades last longer.
Just move one blade to the left or right so the that it moves the material.
You can also move a second blade the opposite the direction of the first blade.
The blades will last a lot longer between sharpens or replacement.

lyall wrote:To make the blades last longer.
Just move one blade to the left or right so the that it moves the material.
You can also move a second blade the opposite the direction of the first blade.
The blades will last a lot longer between sharpens or replacement.

I'd like to hear WHY moving one knife wood make em last longer?