Shopsmith Forums

algale wrote: ↑Tue Dec 13, 2022 9:15 am Want micro adjustability of the quill? Just get a feeler gauge and insert the required thickness gauge between the quill bumper ring and the headsstock.

Don't overlook the fact that if you want bidirectional, precision adjustability you need to start with the quill partially extended.

BTW - whose using a Shopsmith to make precision cuts at this level of accuracy. A feeler gauge???

RFGuy wrote: ↑Tue Dec 13, 2022 10:33 am

algale wrote: ↑Tue Dec 13, 2022 9:15 am Want micro adjustability of the quill? Just get a feeler gauge and insert the required thickness gauge between the quill bumper ring and the headsstock.

Alan,

Thanks. Good point. Isn't it kind of hard to do this in practice though? You have to stoop down to see under the main table and insert a feeler gauge to adjust the quill in/out with the feeler gauge. Not saying it can't be done, but seems like a lot of work for trying to sneak up on a cut I would think.

Dusty questioned the need for feeler gauge. But I've also used auto body shims, which come in sizes from 1/64" to 1/8". https://www.harborfreight.com/144-piece ... 67585.html

Is it hard to do? I don't think so. YMMV. You would also have to compare the difficulty of using a feeler gauge / auto body shim to whatever contraption Shopsmith (or others) would come up with to accomplish micro quill/fence adjustments. For instance, I have a Kreg Band Saw fence for the Shopsmith band saw and it's got a micro adjustment feature that I find more trouble than it is worth.

Btw, Dusty & others created a horizontal micro adjust for the fence using the adjustable stop collar on a tube clamped to the main table behind the fence. Twist collar, move fence in or out by precise amounts. viewtopic.php?t=13175

Incidentally, I find the scale on the quill depth stop is accurate enough for most work.

And a deck of old playing cards also makes great shims. The deck I have measures about 1/96th of an inch per card, or about 5 cards to the 16th. Before getting the adjustable stop collar, I made many fine adjustments with the fixed collars and feeler gages or shims.

Back to ZCI's, though. I recently made a batch for my 500 out of 1/4 inch hardboard, using the pattern sander described in Nick Engler's book "Woodworking Wisdom." To me, it seems simplest and easiest to make a new zci for any angle you might need. I already have zci's for 15, 30 and 45 degrees and it would only take a moment to cut through a blank zci for any other angle I might want.

Just a question for those who have said that they would like to have micro-adjust ability of the rip fence.

What level of precision would you be seeking?

Is it reasonable to assume you are talking about small work pieces and not working on something like 1x 4s or sheet goods?

I really do not see the need to "micro adjust" for saw cuts BUT if there is a need, why not use a dial indicator mounted in the miter track?

dusty wrote: ↑Mon Feb 06, 2023 1:58 pm I really do not see the need to "micro adjust" for saw cuts BUT if there is a need, why not use a dial indicator mounted in the miter track?

I tried this when you posed the question earlier but found that I could not reliably position the fence (520) better than +/- 0.003" of an arbitrary target on the indicator. Contrasting that with the quill feed adjust, which I found that I could reliably position within +/- 0.001" of target. And I would guess the 520 to be an order of magnitude better than 500. I have always used the quill feed for micro-adjust of a cut position, a habit I formed in my pre-500 days because that fence is somewhat harder to lock at a precise distance from the blade. I have no reason to suggest that +/- 0.003" isn't good enough, it is just my observation that it is not as good as the quill method.

- David

DLB wrote: ↑Mon Feb 06, 2023 3:21 pm

dusty wrote: ↑Mon Feb 06, 2023 1:58 pm I really do not see the need to "micro adjust" for saw cuts BUT if there is a need, why not use a dial indicator mounted in the miter track?

I tried this when you posed the question earlier but found that I could not reliably position the fence (520) better than +/- 0.003" of an arbitrary target on the indicator. Contrasting that with the quill feed adjust, which I found that I could reliably position within +/- 0.001" of target. And I would guess the 520 to be an order of magnitude better than 500. I have always used the quill feed for micro-adjust of a cut position, a habit I formed in my pre-500 days because that fence is somewhat harder to lock at a precise distance from the blade. I have no reason to suggest that +/- 0.003" isn't good enough, it is just my observation that it is not as good as the quill method.

- David

Maybe I don't understand the intended procedure here. The object is to get a precisely located cut. To do that I would think the fence was located close- very close to the intended measurement and then locked in place. Then the micro adjust (of the blade) would take place.

My problem here is that I do not do woodworking that requires the saw blade to be so precisely located. Within +/- .003" is in my mind "micro adjusted". How close do you want to get.

I want to be able to adjust the fence to 1/16" based on a visible scale by sliding it manually. After that, I think a micro-adjust should take that down to 1/128". I don't think any finer adjustment than that matters with wood. There are different ways to achieve that kind of adjustment. Shopsmith might want to use a rack mounted to the rail and a pinion gear on the fence because the fence could be non-contiguous, but there are a lot of ways to do it.

dusty wrote: ↑Mon Feb 06, 2023 3:55 pm

DLB wrote: ↑Mon Feb 06, 2023 3:21 pm

dusty wrote: ↑Mon Feb 06, 2023 1:58 pm I really do not see the need to "micro adjust" for saw cuts BUT if there is a need, why not use a dial indicator mounted in the miter track?

I tried this when you posed the question earlier but found that I could not reliably position the fence (520) better than +/- 0.003" of an arbitrary target on the indicator. Contrasting that with the quill feed adjust, which I found that I could reliably position within +/- 0.001" of target. And I would guess the 520 to be an order of magnitude better than 500. I have always used the quill feed for micro-adjust of a cut position, a habit I formed in my pre-500 days because that fence is somewhat harder to lock at a precise distance from the blade. I have no reason to suggest that +/- 0.003" isn't good enough, it is just my observation that it is not as good as the quill method.

- David

Maybe I don't understand the intended procedure here. The object is to get a precisely located cut. To do that I would think the fence was located close- very close to the intended measurement and then locked in place. Then the micro adjust (of the blade) would take place.

My problem here is that I do not do woodworking that requires the saw blade to be so precisely located. Within +/- .003" is in my mind "micro adjusted". How close do you want to get.

As I said, I have no reason to think that +/- 3 thou isn't good enough. If I bought an expensive positioner I'd expect better though. And IIRC micro adjust via the quill feed is the technique in PTWFE, but arguably incompatible with ZCI. This was the first and only time I've measured either with a dial indicator, usually I'm thinking in terms of movement of the quill depth gauge, where I'd say something around half a line width of the scale is a pretty small increment.

- David

dusty wrote: ↑Mon Feb 06, 2023 3:55 pm Maybe I don't understand the intended procedure here. The object is to get a precisely located cut. To do that I would think the fence was located close- very close to the intended measurement and then locked in place. Then the micro adjust (of the blade) would take place.

My problem here is that I do not do woodworking that requires the saw blade to be so precisely located. Within +/- .003" is in my mind "micro adjusted". How close do you want to get.

Dusty,

There are times where a cut is "good enough". Honestly most of woodworking is exactly that. However, there are times where an exact replacement part needs to be constructed or various other reasons where a setup needs to be repeated after that setup has been torn down. SS equipment doesn't give a good way to go back and repeat such a setup unfortunately (Incra positioner is but one example of a 3rd party solution for this). There are a handful of people doing more precision work in woodworking. Segmented bowl turning is but one example, but there are others. Kumiko woodworking requires precision. Another example is some choose to make intricate cutting boards, e.g. creating the illusion of a 3D pattern. Precision matters for this work. Yes, you can try to get all of your pieces ripped while on one setup, but what happens if/when you need to go back for more cuts and you already broke it down for another operation? This is where it matters, i.e. without a repeatable platform you can use precision of micro-adjustability to get back to where that previous setup was set to. Jim McCann even spoke to Nick Engler on his YT channel about one case where he needed very high precision for a wooden music stand I believe - memory may be off here and I don't want to watch the 70min video again, but I think that is what he described. Of course, he didn't do this on a Mark V, but rather his other brand tablesaw, but the same principles apply to either. Bottomline is some woodworkers push the envelope when it comes to woodworking and they NEED the precision, i.e. it is NOT overkill for such people. The rest of us may never get to needing that level of precision, but it is aspirational for us and that is okay too.