Shopsmith Forums

[quote="charlese"]Yep! We woodworkers too often fall back to our math teaching or non-woodworking skills/habits to do what can be done more easily by using common reasoning. We just can't help it:( .

It is often times harder on our paradigms to think easier - and that's just too bad]

If you are saying that those of us who were born, bred, raised, and trained in the interchangeable-part, mass-production world have to think harder to work in the cut-to-fit realm, I heartily agree. I just finished reading the thread in which you and MickyD sparred over cut-list precision for his lantern project, and it was clear to me that MickyD was also trained in the analytic school. And that your method produced better estimates!

Personally, I find measuring with precision to be very satisfying, and the associated mathematics to be quick and easy. But that said, I also want to master the traditional craftsman methods. I am just now beginning to appreciate how well-tuned hand tools, in the hands of an expert craftsman, can outperform power tools in many situations. I want to be proficient at both methods, and know which method is best suited for a particular need. Ditto for custom-fit vs. absolute-precision methods!

BuckeyeDennis wrote:I am just now beginning to appreciate how well-tuned hand tools, in the hands of an expert craftsman, can outperform power tools in many situations. I want to be proficient at both methods, and know which method is best suited for a particular need. Ditto for custom-fit vs. absolute-precision methods!

Performance is relative. If speed of production and/or repeat-ability are issues then the machines are hard to beat.

If the measurement is for strong joints that will last a century or more and an incredible final product, then hand tools are the way to go. I find myself to be a bit of a "hybrid" wood worker electing to use the best tool for the job and final result.

If I'm working with modern engineered products (MDF, Plywood, etc.) it's machines all the way, hand saws, chisels and plane irons just don't hold up to the glue and dull very quickly.

If I'm making several of the same part that should all be the same, then machines it is since the investment in setup time is worth the effort.

If it's a one off project of natural material (most of mine are) then hand tools are what I reach for.

If it's calm relaxing time in the shop without disturbing the family or neighbors then hand tools all the way.

I find myself going to the hand tools more often and increasing my vintage hand tool collection. So nice not to have to run the dust collector, hearing protection, eye protection, guards, etc. All of the modern stuff that makes it safer to use the machines act as barriers to the wood.

I prefer to work the wood rather than machine the wood.

BuckeyeDennis wrote:If you are saying that those of us who were born, bred, raised, and trained in the interchangeable-part, mass-production world have to think harder to work in the cut-to-fit realm, I heartily agree.

Personally, I find measuring with precision to be very satisfying, and the associated mathematics to be quick and easy. But that said, I also want to master the traditional craftsman methods. I am just now beginning to appreciate how well-tuned hand tools, in the hands of an expert craftsman, can outperform power tools in many situations. I want to be proficient at both methods, and know which method is best suited for a particular need. Ditto for custom-fit vs. absolute-precision methods!

Well said, my Buckeye friend! Wish I had said that! Also wish we all would go in that direction!

BuckeyeDennis wrote: . . . I just finished reading the thread in which you and MickyD sparred over cut-list precision for his lantern project, and it was clear to me that MickyD was also trained in the analytic school. And that your method produced better estimates!
. . .

Ahh yes, but 'who' created the cut 'plan'!:D

MickyD was looking for a 'program'. All he needed was a thinking cap!;)

[quote="JPG40504"]Ahh yes, but 'who' created the cut 'plan'!:D

MickyD was looking for a 'program'. All he needed was a thinking cap!]

To quote MickyD: Holy COW!!!! I found the cutting layout optimization software and it's inside jpg's head!!!

A.k.a. "wetware"

BuckeyeDennis wrote:To quote MickyD: Holy COW!!!! I found the cutting layout optimization software and it's inside jpg's head!!!

A.k.a. "wetware"

Moistware! [Not all wet]