Shopsmith Forums

kalynzoo wrote:The concept of "good enough" leads me to some deep introspection. Today I went to a community fair, where a local "craftsman" was selling hand made puzzles. I use the word craftsman lightly, as the hand painted pictures were rough and sketchy, the puzzles were cut on construction grade ply, with the voids exposed, and the finish was a much too thick poly glaze. But they were selling. They were being appreciated by the masses, and they were selling. Not in great quantity, but they were selling. I would never, ever, exhibit this as my work. Guess I am too much of a perfectionist, as I have been told. But then again, I don't create items in production quantity for sale. For this craftsman, the work was good enough. And I applaud his attempt to share his skill with others. Like I starting, the topic makes me ramble on in deep thought.
If there is a moral, perhaps it is that good enough is in the eyes of the beholder. I think I'm now 15 hours into making a pair of alphabet puzzles for the twins. Keep on making sawdust.

I am glad you are "introspecting"
I intend to keep talking about these things (sorry guys) just to keep folks thinking about their approach to a any of their hobbies. I have a now retired neighbor who has told about everybody in the neighborhood that I taught him how to not be so uptight all of the time.
If you are stressing over your hobby you obviously have not reached "enlightenment" yet.
Have you looked at those big cranes with a long beam sticking out one side a long ways? I sort of think of my myself as the counter weight (hold the fat jokes) that hangs off of the back of the crane to add "balance" to the situation. While there is no hope for some guys my desire is to convince some, especially the new to the hobby folks, that no matter what you do / did for a living that you need not be anal about your hobbies.
-
Back to "good enough". I often react very negatively inside when I see truly "crappy" woodworking being sold in volume at flea Markets etc. As I said before, "In all productive environments accuracy and productivity must be balanced". "Balanced" does not mean "crappy". To me it means "appropriate".
I enjoy reproducing some of the utilitarian and sometimes rustic woodworking done by many of my ancestors. I do not include in my personal notion of "rustic" such things as a row of tater bins (a nice little project) with router burns half an inch deep, split boards and the hinges falling off of it.
-
A lot of the "beauty" in home made items (not production stuff) comes from the love that went into them. My wife's grandfather made each of his numerous granddaughters a simple corner shelf when they married. He just cut 3 shelves out of 1/4" plywood and spaced them out with wooden spools (her grandmother was a seamstress) stacked on lengths of 1/8" "all-thread" rods with acorn nuts at the ends and gave them a coat of color varnish. They look pretty nice as long as you stand back about 12 feet. His only two power tools were a 1/4" drill and a hand-held saber saw. He didn't have very many more hand tools.
My wife and her sisters guard their treasured "Grandpa" shelves like they were the Hope Diamond...
Keep at it but enjoy it.

Precision, what are we talking about?

There are really (at least) two discussions going on when ever this word is used here on the forum.

There is one school that seems to say precision can be taken too far because, after all, we are working with wood and over time wood changes size and shape. Close enough is the best we can strive for without getting ridiculous.

There is the other school that says precision is necessary and readily achievable if you are willing to spend some time up front. Safety is important, too. A safe shop is near impossible if your equipment is not properly aligned.

The miter tracks and the rip fence must be parallel to the blade. With these as your only objectives, alignment can be done with "close enough" as the standard. Close enough to not create an unsafe condition - no binding, no kickback.

However, once you are this close, it is very easy to get your Mark V dead on. I used to think that 1/16" was pretty darn close and 1/32" was getting a bit anal. Now accuracy to within .0315" is pretty darn close and can be achieved without being anal. Just pay close attention while doing your alignments using a square and straight edge and you are there.

This by the way is one place where you have to get a bit anal. If your square isn't square and your straight edge isn't straight., you don't have a chance.

Notice that I have not made mention of a caliper or a dial indicator. Why, because we have been discussing "close enough" applications.

If this is good enough for what you do in your shop, good. Strive no more for "precision". You are there by definition.

However, if you want accuracy to within 1/1000ths of an inch, you got some work to do. Just know that it can be achieved using your Shopsmith Mark V. I know because I have done it! But, you must get anal about a few things. A dial indicator helps.

Repeatability is another criteria but we hardly ever speak of repeatability. That is possible, too, with your Mark V. In my opinion, repeatability is more of a discipline than it is an adjustment to the equipment.

With precision and repeatability, you can do "fine wood working" on your Mark V.

There are forum members here who demonstrate that regularly. We have seen pictures of their fine works. Some of them like to argue that this "precision" is not necessary and they might be right but their work shows that it is achievable even if not necessary.

For me, as an experienced newbie to this, being anal about the precision of my equipment helps me eliminate a variable. If my results are unsatisfactory, and the machine is dead on, I know to focus on my technique. My technique can't be verified and checked with dial indicators and calipers. The machine can. So for me, it's not about being anal with the machine, but being able to confidently move on to the actual woodworking. With experience, and more confidence in my technique and abilities, perhaps I'll be less concerned with getting the machines accurate to within .001.

In defense of the guy turning out low grade projects at the craft show I would have to say in this case "good enough" means what he can sell. He is probably just trying to keep his hourly rate above minimum wage.

Most people really have no idea of how things go together and have little appreciation for the skill and time involved in making a higher quality item. Instead they see vendor A selling widgets for $10 and vendor B selling a nicer made version for $100 with no appreciation for the fact that it probably took 20 time as long for B to make his products.

Finally, for those still struggling with the Morse code, I found a great converter:

http://www.csgnetwork.com/morsecodedeconv.html

heathicus wrote:For me, as an experienced newbie to this, being anal about the precision of my equipment helps me eliminate a variable. If my results are unsatisfactory, and the machine is dead on, I know to focus on my technique. My technique can't be verified and checked with dial indicators and calipers. The machine can. So for me, it's not about being anal with the machine, but being able to confidently move on to the actual woodworking. With experience, and more confidence in my technique and abilities, perhaps I'll be less concerned with getting the machines accurate to within .001.

To maintain your own sanity, I would suggest that your target precision numbers be about + or - .005" and if you use an inclinometer + or - .2 degrees.

You can get a little bit better than that but I'm not convinced that there is a dividend.

These numbers are UNACHIEVABLE if you don't have all of the locking points properly secured. This becomes painfully obvious if you'll do a complete alignment without locking the carriage or the headstock and then, while watching a dial indicator, tighten those locks.

Securing the headstock can easily change .010" in your settings; same for the carriage.

horologist wrote:In defense of the guy turning out low grade projects at the craft show I would have to say in this case "good enough" means what he can sell. He is probably just trying to keep his hourly rate above minimum wage.

Most people really have no idea of how things go together and have little appreciation for the skill and time involved in making a higher quality item. Instead they see vendor A selling widgets for $10 and vendor B selling a nicer made version for $100 with no appreciation for the fact that it probably took 20 time as long for B to make his products.

Finally, for those still struggling with the Morse code, I found a great converter:

http://www.csgnetwork.com/morsecodedeconv.html

Thanks for the converter. I might be able to bring my code speed back. All I need now is to find something that will read my key, as I code, and present the display on the monitor.

I had to learn code when I went into the service to qualify for my AFSC proficiency level. That's an MOS to you non-AF guys. About the time I qualified, they deleted the requirement.

I think the concept that you are missing here is the definition of "good enough". You are confusing it with "sloppy" which is not what it means at all. It means exactly "good enough" for what ever you are building. On a picnic table close enough can be pretty sloppy but on a project like you mention sloppy is not "close enough". "Close enough" can require great accuracy in such cases.
Pl

I don't think I missed that point, as the author seemed to ridicule his friend's effort to achieve a "glue-line rip" using a saw, something that is easily achieved with a decent saw blade like a Forrest WW II. Moreover, if someone's set-up on the table saw can't get a square edge for gluing, I'm not sure that his jointer's "good enough" set-up would achieve it either.

Also, the author says: "it's more fun to build a project than worry about thousands of an inch." He doesn't qualify that statement, but if you've ever cut mortise and tenons, dovetails, dowel joints, etc., you know that a good fit (down to a few thousands) is required if you want a quality joint.

Nevertheless, I'm for enjoying ones hobbies and if good enough makes someone happy, then that's fine with me. But, a magazine like Wood shouldn't fill space in its magazine with articles that seem to minimize precision.

Art in Western Penna

pennview wrote:I don't think I missed that point, as the author seemed to ridicule his friend's effort to achieve a "glue-line rip" using a saw, something that is easily achieved with a decent saw blade like a Forrest WW II. Moreover, if someone's set-up on the table saw can't get a square edge for gluing, I'm not sure that his jointer's "good enough" set-up would achieve it either.

Also, the author says: "it's more fun to build a project than worry about thousands of an inch." He doesn't qualify that statement, but if you've ever cut mortise and tenons, dovetails, dowel joints, etc., you know that a good fit (down to a few thousands) is required if you want a quality joint.

Nevertheless, I'm for enjoying ones hobbies and if good enough makes someone happy, then that's fine with me. But, a magazine like Wood shouldn't fill space in its magazine with articles that seem to minimize precision.

Art in Western Penna

I thank you for your comments. You make me feel like I might not be all alone in the quest for some level of "precision".

pennview wrote:I don't think I missed that point, .......

Also, the author says: "it's more fun to build a project than worry about thousands of an inch." He doesn't qualify that statement, but if you've ever cut mortise and tenons, dovetails, dowel joints, etc., you know that a good fit (down to a few thousands) is required if you want a quality joint.

Art in Western Penna

I like to watch Roy on the Woodwright's Shop PBS show. He doesn't worry about thousandths, seems to have a lot of fun building, and shows some historical pieces several hundred years old that have horrible looking but obviously quite functional "quality" joints. They sure weren't cut down to within a few thousandths.

It fun to watch how they used to do it. The standards now days are looks and function, with looks having quite an influence on perceived quality.

mickyd wrote:I like to watch Roy on the Woodwright's Shop PBS show. He doesn't worry about thousandths, seems to have a lot of fun building, and shows some historical pieces several hundred years old that have horrible looking but obviously quite functional "quality" joints. They sure weren't cut down to within a few thousandths.

It fun to watch how they used to do it. The standards now days are looks and function, with looks having quite an influence on perceived quality.

Influence on perceived quality --- sorta like polished aluminum?:)

Roy Underwood is great, there is no question about that and he can do things with old hand tools that I would never even try, even with power tools. However, he has a life time of learning behind him.