Page 1 of 2

Stabilizing Your Mark V

Posted: Thu Jun 05, 2008 10:49 am
by dusty
In the most recent "Tip" Nick suggests that the stability of the Shopsmith main table can be improved by attaching it, using extension tubes, to one of the Extension Tables.

Now I whole heartedly agree with that assessment. I do not intend to be challenging that at all.

But, if one is good, would two be better? Is it adviseable to purchase a second Extension Table (and 5' Extension Tubes if you don't already have them) to still further increase table stability?:confused:

If you believe that the 2nd extension table would be a valuable asset, is your opinion based on improved "accuracy" or "repeatability"?:confused:

Stabilizing

Posted: Thu Jun 05, 2008 3:57 pm
by rcoder
Dusty,

Me thinks that might be over kill. I have been using the technique shown in the video for years. Moving the table at that point would result in moving the whose machine. Also with something like the sander or band saw on the other end would mean their removal.

Since I am not always a very good planner I often forget an operation that requires going back to the band saw or belt sander. You technique would require more removal and replacement.

Bob
Willcox, AZ

Stabilizing

Posted: Thu Jun 05, 2008 3:58 pm
by rcoder
Dusty,

Me thinks that might be over kill. I have been using the technique shown in the video for years. Moving the table at that point would result in moving the whole machine. Also with something like the sander or band saw on the other end would mean their removal.

Since I am not always a very good planner I often forget an operation that requires going back to the band saw or belt sander. You technique would require more removal and replacement.

Bob
Willcox, AZ

Posted: Thu Jun 05, 2008 7:59 pm
by charlese
dusty wrote:.....If you believe that the 2nd extension table would be a valuable asset, is your opinion based on improved "accuracy" or "repeatability"?:confused:
What about if I don't agree? I side in with Bob on this one! It amounts to overkill for all the reasons Bob states, plus - - Do you really think it is worth the cost of an additional extension table to achieve the amount of improved accuracy it MAY produce? I thought I recently read about a guy that thought paying $3 and change for a taper screw was outlandish.

I'd be paying out $170 (extension table) for a doubtful added .001"? stability - Not for me!

But keep on thinking, Dusty! The previous idea with the extension table was a dandy! :D They all can't be winners. It took T.Edison many, many tries to get his first working vacuum light bulb. It took a team of engineers 40 tries to get to WD-40. :rolleyes:

Stabilizing Your Mark V

Posted: Thu Jun 05, 2008 8:58 pm
by dusty
Charlese: These were QUESTIONS not assessments.

But, if one is good, would two be better? Is it adviseable to purchase a second Extension Table (and 5' Extension Tubes if you don't already have them) to still further increase table stability?:confused:

If you believe that the 2nd extension table would be a valuable asset, is your opinion based on improved "accuracy" or "repeatability"?:confused:


I quess I can take it that your answer is an unequivocal NO to all three questions.

Posted: Thu Jun 05, 2008 9:41 pm
by charlese
dusty wrote:Charlese: These were QUESTIONS not assessments.

But, if one is good, would two be better? Is it adviseable to purchase a second Extension Table (and 5' Extension Tubes if you don't already have them) to still further increase table stability?:confused:

If you believe that the 2nd extension table would be a valuable asset, is your opinion based on improved "accuracy" or "repeatability"?:confused:


I guess I can take it that your answer is an unequivocal NO to all three questions.
You are right on! NO!

Additionally, I need to point out - your origional question above (bold print) categorically omits comments from anyone not believing a 2nd extension table would be a valuable asset. That's why I asked: "What if I don't agree?" I'd still like to comment - so did!

Posted: Thu Jun 05, 2008 10:15 pm
by kalynzoo
As much as I plan a project, I find that after using the drill press, I lower the SS and use the saw or bandsaw, only to find I need another set of holes someplace. Switch now is a simple process taking a minute or less. Re-setting my jig, well that's another thing. The thought of breaking down support tables takes all the fun out. KIS...keep it simple (I left out the last S so as not to be offensive.) As for the need for additonal support...my SS sets up rock steady. For the small detailed projects I enjoy I see no reason for additonal support.

Posted: Thu Jun 05, 2008 11:31 pm
by curiousgeorge
(I left out the last S so as not to be offensive.)
Gary,
I might suggest that if the last "S" in KISS is offensive to someone, then that someone should see a therapist. ;)
IMHO this "PC" stuff is a little out of control.:mad:

Posted: Fri Jun 06, 2008 12:46 am
by a1gutterman
curiousgeorge wrote:...IMHO this "PC" stuff is a little out of control.:mad:
I agree completely, George!!

Gary,
How does Keep It Simple Silly grab you?

Dusty,
I do knot see how the second extension table wood make a difference in accuracy (what Nick demonstrated was a completely stable table top:D ), but if that is what you want to do, it certainly won't hurt anything, except maybe your pocket book! On the other hand, the set up that you are hypothesizing wood be a larger and more stable support for crosscutting...
Between that and your infeed and outfeed tables, maybe you could start cutting large panels on the SS.Image

Posted: Fri Jun 06, 2008 1:12 am
by dusty
charlese wrote:You are right on! NO!

Additionally, I need to point out - your origional question above (bold print) categorically omits comments from anyone not believing a 2nd extension table would be a valuable asset. That's why I asked: "What if I don't agree?" I'd still like to comment - so did!

Geez Charlese I'm sorry! But if you had stopped to answer the questions in the first place the discussion was over.

A NO would have meant - you do not believe they would be an asset.