# Back To Mike On The MJ Splitter



## Jerry Bowen (Jun 25, 2011)

I'm slowiy learning. The splitter for the full kerf blade is .112", whick is .008" less than the width of a .125" thick blade. Therefore the splitter only comes in contact with the edges of the cut if the board begins to pinch, otherwise the cut is wide enough to just pass over the splitter with minimum of contact with the splitter. I say this as how I see it at the moment.

If this is true then a splitter for the thin kerf blade needs to be less than the width of the thin kerf blade which is about .091". I don't know but will be asking MJ what the thickness of the splitters are for the thin kerf blade but I suspect they will tell me that it is near .080". 

The next issue to find out is if the splitters for the thin kerf blade can be installed in a ZC insert plate that has been set up for the full kerf blade, if they can't, then a person will be forced to buy a separate kit for the thinner blade. I'll make a phone call to MJ and get back to you.

Jerry


----------



## Jerry Bowen (Jun 25, 2011)

I must provide a lot of laughs to the members of this forum as I skip along with my learning curve. I called MJ and got the straight scoop on the splitter system and purchased a kit for the thin kerf blade. I am going to attempt to make my own table insert for it, as suggested by Doug several months ago. Doug was good enough to send me the inserts for the leveling screws that I will be needing, thank you again Doug. Anyway I'm learning, but as I said, I must provide some of you at least with an abundance of chuckels. The good part is that I laugh at myself too and that is O.K.

Jerrry


----------



## MAFoElffen (Jun 8, 2012)

<<Written while you where writing post number 2, but we came up with the same conclusion:>>

Info from Micro Jig:

SP-G-P3, Green, Standard width replacement splitters A & B, 8.95.

SP-Y-P3, Yellow, Thinkerf width replacement splitters A & B, 8.95.

Free shipping and handling on both.

Heck, a complete kit each is only $24.95... Combo kit with both sizes is $44.95. Looks like since they have a combo-kit, that they imply it works with either.

If you do the math- You have a left-tilt saw. When you have a .116" blade in and the splitter is .105", you have .005" on each side. You put in a splitter .025" thinner and use a .025" thinner blade... If used in the same insert, it would be better if they molded the pieces offset to the arbor flange side, so that they were directional and sided up to the arbor flange side as constant... but even if they didn't, being they are just plastic and have some flex, they will work. 

But since you now found out that your thin kerf blade would work better with a pair of stabilizers and would have to make another insert to use your thin kerf blade with an offset caused by that... Isn't that leaning towards making another zero clearance insert for your thin kerf blade offset (offset right the thickness of one of the two stiffener halves) and then buying a thin kerf MJ Splitter kit for thin kerf blades, to install in that new thin kerf blade zero clearance insert? 

Just thinking...


----------



## Jerry Bowen (Jun 25, 2011)

MAFoElffen said:


> <<Written while you where writing post number 2, but we came up with the same conclusion:>>
> 
> Info from Micro Jig:
> 
> ...


Mike,
The parts are not interchangeable, you need a ZC insert for each set up or an insert that can be reversed end for end and do two set-ups on the same ZC insert. The pins in the bottom of the the splitters are spaced differently, wonder why they did that, Ummmm


My insert fits but the keepers (I'm referring to the pin on one end of the insert and the adjustment screw at the other end) would have to be reversed, no big deal, but I have cut all of those holes in my insert to create better air flow for the DC so, in my case I'll just make the second insert.

I paid $39.95 and freight for the complete orange kit this morning, supposedly on sale.
That's for the Steel Pro Kit.

I'll need to go to Forrest and buy the second stiffener so that I can have one on each side of the blade and of course do that before cutting into the new ZC insert which wil be made of half inch MDF.

Did you speak to the R.O. of the arbor, if you did I must have missed it.

Jerry


----------



## MAFoElffen (Jun 8, 2012)

Jerry Bowen said:


> <editted>
> Did you speak to the R.O. of the arbor, if you did I must have missed it.


Yes I did. But if you measured 0.003" runout at 9" out on your blade <-> you have very little runout at the arbor flange. 

Any runout at the arbor flange would increase as it went further out, unless the blade was turned on the arbor to offset that by any blade runout.)

Most people say that 0.005" ro at the arbor is acceptable. I usually try to true the arbor flange to less that 0.001" (0.02mm). Takes lots of time and patience and has to be done on the saw. (I use a jig, router and abrasive bit.)


----------



## Jerry Bowen (Jun 25, 2011)

MAFoElffen said:


> Yes I did. But if you measured 0.003" runout at 9" out on your blade <-> you have very little runout at the arbor flange.
> 
> Any runout at the arbor flange would increase as it went further out, unless the blade was turned on the arbor to offset that by any blade runout.)
> 
> Most people say that 0.005" ro at the arbor is acceptable. I usually try to true the arbor flange to less that 0.001" (0.02mm). Takes lots of time and patience and has to be done on the saw. (I use a jig, router and abrasive bit.)


Mike, 

I think that you implied and I think I understand that excessive run out of the arbor would show up in excessive width of the cut and it appears to me that the amount of material that is being removed by the blade is just about exactly the same as the width of the blade.


----------



## MAFoElffen (Jun 8, 2012)

Yes.


----------



## david_de (Jun 3, 2013)

Jerry Bowen said:


> I must provide a lot of laughs to the members of this forum as I skip along with my learning curve. Anyway I'm learning, but as I said, I must provide some of you at least with an abundance of chuckles. The good part is that I laugh at myself too and that is O.K.
> 
> Jerrry


Some may get a laugh out of it but I have learned too that there are always others who have the same question but did not ask. There are some very bright and talented people on this forum but none of them seem to know everything. A few are very close but not yet there. I read every post because some might have answers that I do not yet know enough to ask the question.

My wife often reminds me that knowing too much leaves very little room to learn. Not sure what her message is to me in that, I am afraid to ask.


----------



## Jerry Bowen (Jun 25, 2011)

MAFoElffen said:


> Yes.


Mike,
My remark about the amount of material that is removed by a blade during a cut was not clear. Let me see if I can ask it or express my thinking a little better. What I am wondering is this, if an arbor if has excessive R.O. will the cut made by a blade that is installed on that arbor be wider due the excessive R.O. than it would have been with minimal or no R,O. It's seems to me that the consequences of excessive Rl.O. of the arbor would show up in the wider cut. Are we on the same page on this matter, my opinion is purely coming from my head and not from experience and/or better knowledge sof such matters.

Jerry


----------



## MAFoElffen (Jun 8, 2012)

Jerry Bowen said:


> Mike,
> My remark about the amount of material that is removed by a blade during a cut was not clear. Let me see if I can ask it or express my thinking a little better. What I am wondering is this, if an arbor if has excessive R.O. will the cut made by a blade that is installed on that arbor be wider due the excessive R.O. than it would have been with minimal or no R,O. It's seems to me that the consequences of excessive Rl.O. of the arbor would show up in the wider cut. Are we on the same page on this matter, my opinion is purely coming from my head and not from experience and/or better knowledge sof such matters.
> 
> Jerry


Yes. We are on the same page. 

If the blade, arbor or both had excessive r.o., either would cause the blade to wobble, causing a wider cut. Example- Cutting like a wobble dado. Being a wider cut than the blade would normally, it would be excessively wider than the plate and splitter, causing the cut to wander, instead of tracking straight... 

Another would be if the blade and arbor were not perpendicular to the left miter (out of tune). That would cause a wider cut by cutting one side with the toe of the blade and the other side of the cut by dragging the heel of the blade against the kerf... (although some set some normal minute toe-in preset.)

However the tune is set by "gauges"... The real truth is in the cut and adjusting from there to it cutting straight and true. Yours is in tune (or it seems from your description).

With the too large splitter, it was dragging... and dragging more on one side than the other... but it was not dragging enough to pull the splitter piece out. Dragging on side would tend to cause a slight curve, maybe not notable, but... And cause you to have to push a little harder than normal... which is not a good thing when you consider that those forces are causing you to push (excessively) in a direction into the blade...


----------



## Willway (Aug 16, 2012)

Any check the RO of an arbor should be checked at the arbor shaft or the flange, not at the blade. This eliminates the possibility of mistaking a warped blade giving you a bad reading. I think Jerry just had a bad kickback which can cause the blade to warp.


----------



## MAFoElffen (Jun 8, 2012)

Willway said:


> Any check the RO of an arbor should be checked at the arbor shaft or the flange, not at the blade. This eliminates the possibility of mistaking a warped blade giving you a bad reading. I think Jerry just had a bad kickback which can cause the blade to warp.


Yes, true. I check mine at the arbor flange, all the way up and set to 45 degrees so I can measure it easier as I turn my arbor (with the belt off it)... But being 0.003" at 9" out from center would only be around 0.0004" at the flange. If he was curious, otherwise...

Did I miss posts his kickback? Was that with the MJ splitter and thin-kerf blade he has on now?


----------



## Jerry Bowen (Jun 25, 2011)

MAFoElffen said:


> Yes, true. I check mine at the arbor flange, all the way up and set to 45 degrees so I can measure it easier as I turn my arbor (with the belt off it)... But being 0.003" at 9" out from center would only be around 0.0004" at the flange. If he was curious, otherwise...
> 
> Did I miss posts his kickback? Was that with the MJ splitter and thin-kerf blade he has on now?


Mike,]

Yes you must have missed the kick back. It had noting to do with the splitter. I had made cut with the ripper and had set the magnetic feather board up too, kind of like wearing a belt and set of suspenders for insurance. The set up was to cut a piece that I could use for a test that I was making on the band saw. A little later I needed another piece for further testing on the BS and picked up a piece of scrap that was thinner than then first piece that I used to set up MF and so the FB of was of not value on thinner piece, The pieces of scrap was short only about 8 or 10". I ripped it and didn't push on through and took the the push stick away just the saw set and run for a few seconds with the piece still laying on the table unsupported. I don't know why I did that but after a couple of seconds the vibration or what ever allowed the free floating piece of scrap to catch between the fence and the blade. The good news is that I was standing off to the left side of the line of fire and the when the kick back occurred, well you can imagine the rest. By the way, the part being cut was wide enough that I had been able to use a push stick on the part between the fence and the blade and would have normally just pushed it all the way through, anyway, I got the message about letting a piece get trapped between the fence and the blade. The piece of wood went thirty feet across the shop traveling in a very flat trajectory due to its high rate of speed and really hit the far wall with tremendious force. But as I said, it was not the fault of the splitter or the MF it was a perfect example of operator error and lesson well learned.

By the way, the reason for the pieces being cut for the test on the BS was in regard to my finding out if the blade on BS really did need to be replaced, it did and it has been.

Once again however I learned something on this post from you about how to tillt the blade to 45 degrees, take the blade and the belt off and then do a check, I'm going to do that and get back to you on what the results are. See, I learned something again. I had never had an reason to check the RO on the arbor let alone how to do it, now I know.

Jerry


----------



## MAFoElffen (Jun 8, 2012)

Good to hear you came through that okay and that you can learn from that unscatched.

You know... If it did tweak that blade, a sharpening shop could have straightened and re-tensioned it.

If I'm cutting something small like that, I pull my rip fence forward towards me and push the piece past end of the fence, which I set somewhere just shy of the blade's leading edge to a point back 45 degree angle from the arbor, depending on what I'm doing. (see attached) I think PhilP discribed that technique to you. I remember him telling you, you could clamp a block of wood to your fence to in-effect do the same thing. That way the piece isn't trapped between the fence and blade.

One thing I'll add to that... If it is short pieces I'm cutting, I have a deflector I made that moves it away from the blade and behind the end of the fence after it's cut.








I got the idea from one made by Aigner. I've only seen the above picture of theirs and thought it a good idea. In that picture, Aigner shows it being used with a crosscut sled (x-guide). Aigner is a company that sells accessories for saws in Europe... Like for Altendorf's and Martin's.

The one I made for myself was from 1x4 pine, about 2' long. I used a forsner bit, recessed and glued magnets to the bottom... then used a leftover cabinet handle. I set the point close to the blade plate side or against the riving knife... and it keeps loose pieces that have been cut from coming back into contact with the blade.

Just a technique... But I thought worth mentioning.


----------



## Jerry Bowen (Jun 25, 2011)

This might be a good place and/or a good time to ask a question that I have been wondering about for some time in regard to trapping a piece of wood between the blace and the fence. Doing this has been warned against time and time again, and whie I am not challenging the value of and/or the wisdom of the warning I still have a question. What I have done in the past before being told about the hazards of such practice, I would use scrap pieces of molding to check the length of a cross cut. The molding is less than three inches wide which means that when ia piece of it is cut off, the cut is completed before the far edge of molding reachs the far teeth of the blade. The blade is not thick as the the width of the teeth so that after the cut is completed the cut off part can't be caught by the teeth on the saw and and thrown back. So simply by turning the saw off the cut off pieces sits between the blde and the fence with several thousandths of space between the the end of the cut off iece and the blade. For this reason I did not see that there was much danger in making such a cut. I certainly do understand the danger if the piece being cut is wide enough to require that the piece being cut must reach the teeth on the far side of the blade before the cut is completed. I guess my question is simply this, isn't cross cutting a narrow piece of wood a let less dangerous than on that is wider than than the dimeter of the saw blade??. I do understand that if the piece should for some reason get turned slightly that it could bind between the blade and the fence and that is where the potential danger lies, but isn't that danger somewhat minimal. I'm not suggesting that it is a good practice but is has been a good way to calibrate the scale on the TS LS system. I just set the cursor on, for example, on the three inch mark, make the cross cut on a narrow piece of wood and then with the dial caliper measure the results, make the correction if needed with the micro adjust and test the result and if and when the cut is three inches, set the three inch mark on the scale to match the curson on the carrage and reset the micro adjust to zero. I know that this practice is still going to be warned against, but I don't see it to be as dangerious as has been implied. Guess that shows my ignorance, but I'm just expressing my thinking and why I have done it in the past. I am attempting to avoid it now due to the warnings and believe that using longer rip cut are safer and a another way to calibrate the system, but and this is interesting, a rip made with a long piece of wood when the system is set on three iinches, may well be three inches, but the same setting won't be three inches if the cut is a cross cut. This may or may not be an issue depending on the application. Usually the exact length or width of a cut is not terribly important, what is important is how well the workpiece fits where it is suppose to fit and/or do opposing parts, such as in a frame, match, in other words are the exactly the same length, the actul length is not the issue. Anyway, I'm rambling nd will close this before I bore you to tears.


Jerry


----------



## MAFoElffen (Jun 8, 2012)

Jerry Bowen said:


> This might be a good place and/or a good time to ask a question that I have been wondering about for some time in regard to trapping a piece of wood between the blace and the fence. Doing this has been warned against time and time again, and whie I am not challenging the value of and/or the wisdom of the warning I still have a question.
> 
> What I have done in the past before being told about the hazards of such practice, I would use scrap pieces of molding to check the length of a cross cut. The molding is less than three inches wide which means that when ia piece of it is cut off, the cut is completed before the far edge of molding reachs the far teeth of the blade. The blade is not thick as the the width of the teeth so that after the cut is completed the cut off part can't be caught by the teeth on the saw and and thrown back. So simply by turning the saw off the cut off pieces sits between the blde and the fence with several thousandths of space between the the end of the cut off iece and the blade. For this reason I did not see that there was much danger in making such a cut. I certainly do understand the danger if the piece being cut is wide enough to require that the piece being cut must reach the teeth on the far side of the blade before the cut is completed.
> 
> ...


LOL!

Okay. This is how I see it. If a piece is not pushed past the blade and/or fence after the cut is complete, there is a danger of trapping, kickback and becoming a missile. (irregardless of the width of the piece)... A 2 inch wide piece being crosscut, as one end turns, is trapped between the blade and fence... as it losses control, what is your normal reaction? To be in control or duck & cover? Where are your hands? Irregardless of the size or which way the grain is oriented, it is not a safe situation.

How I look at crosscuts and rips, is not how the grain is oriented, but with the technique used and the fence I use. But anytime a cut is finished and the material hasn't cleared the blade yet, that time is decisive and you should be totally aware of what is going on... and what needs to happen to get the material clear. If the material is then between a blade and a fence, that multiplies what "could" happen.

You know that a normal size TS blade tooth is traveling around 100 mph right? When those speeds are considered, things happen fast.

Example, I once watched a video of someone who tried to film and "make" a kickback happen with a sheet of Styrofoam as a demonstration. He was successful at making it occur and the guy thought if was funny... until he played it back in slow motion. On the Styrofoam and the slow motion, it showed the material rise in back of the blade and the underside was grabbed by the blade and launched... He then found that his body's natural reaction was to try to retain control of the material and his hands had just missed having blade contact. He was shocked that he was very lucky not to be hurt. and had not even realized it!


----------



## TwoSkies57 (Feb 23, 2009)

Kickback Youtube video: 

Kickback on Camera! - YouTube


----------



## Jerry Bowen (Jun 25, 2011)

MAFoElffen said:


> LOL!
> 
> Okay. This is how I see it. If a piece is not pushed past the blade and/or fence after the cut is complete, there is a danger of trapping, kickback and becoming a missile. (irregardless of the width of the piece)... A 2 inch wide piece being crosscut, as one end turns, is trapped between the blade and fence... as it losses control, what is your normal reaction? To be in control or duck & cover? Where are your hands? Irregardless of the size or which way the grain is oriented, it is not a safe situation.
> 
> ...


Mike,
Only an idiot would argue with you on what you are pointing out, I have no logical defence for what I had been doing except ignorance. You asked about where my hands were in making the the unsafe cross cut. Well, they were to the left of the blade holding he piece of molding hard again the miter gauge out of line with the the direction that the kicked back piece would fly, maybe????. I am not argueing, just saying that I think what happens is that if the piece I question would for some reason remain where is was when the cut was finished that the odds are that it would be O.K. until the blade quite turning, but it could, due to vibration migrate to the outfeed edge of the blade where the teeth could catch it and cause the kick back. In other words, in order for a kick back to occur doesn't the piece in question have to come in contact with the teeth on the blade? Just a technical point, and not an argument to take the chance. I am now using the Incra Express sled with the miter gauge and fence attached. The problem with this, and it isn't a great problem, but you give the value of the LS system in that you can no longer take advantage of what the system was purchased for in the first place.

I'm not sure that all of this back and forth has much value, other than I have come to understand the potential danger and hopefully other members will be saved from making the same mistake that I did and not get hurt and that in itself is worth the time and effort.

Jerry


----------



## Cherryville Chuck (Sep 28, 2010)

Jerry if the piece started to rotate it might get wedged between the fence and the blade and could get thrown that way too without having to touch the teeth. I'm not sure how like that is, especially with the slick coatings on many blades, but it isn't worth taking a chance on because it will bend the blade when it happens.

To set the cursor on your LS you can rip a strip instead which is much safer than using the miter gauge. If you still want to use the fence and miter gauge together you can add a spacer at the front end of the fence, such as 3/4 mdf, and just add that thickness to your setting. That is more than accurate enough for woodworking.


----------



## MAFoElffen (Jun 8, 2012)

Cherryville Chuck said:


> Jerry if the piece started to rotate it might get wedged between the fence and the blade and could get thrown that way too without having to touch the teeth. I'm not sure how like that is, especially with the slick coatings on many blades, but it isn't worth taking a chance on because it will bend the blade when it happens.
> 
> To set the cursor on your LS you can rip a strip instead which is much safer than using the miter gauge. If you still want to use the fence and miter gauge together you can add a spacer at the front end of the fence, such as 3/4 mdf, and just add that thickness to your setting. That is more than accurate enough for woodworking.


+1.

That is what I described in an earlier post here. That is, in effect, what I do when I pull and lock my rip fence towards me... It becomes a stop or support forward of the blade.
http://www.routerforums.com/tools-woodworking/43392-back-mike-mj-splitter-2.html#post354326

Using a block as a stop is what PhilP, you and I recommended to Jerry about a year ago in an older thread... when he described how he was cutting those pieces of moulding with his miter gauge and rip fence. What I was thinking for Jerry and his Incra TS (the fence extrusion on that) is if he uses a fence extension of a set thickness, drills holes in it with tapered heads to use coutersunk head 1/4" allen head screws and t-nuts (to mount it to his fence extrusion)... Then he has a fence face that he can lock that fence face in positions (forward of the blade to 45 degrees back from the arbor) to use the same techniques... reducing the risk of trapping. That could be a good winter project(?)

I know that is more elaborate than just using a clamped block of wood, but it would remind Jerry to use that technique and make it easy for him to facilitate. 
*** That block could also be a piece of UHMW plastic or aluminum plate (no or little expansion) planed to 1", that way his conversion would be easier. (just subtract 1.0" from his scale). 

But (again) as an alternate, he could just clamp a stop block or make a small stop block to mount to his fence's t-slots...

This technique is also, in effect, what you do when you use a "thin stock guide" as a stop... while using a crosscut fence, miter gauge or sled.









Charles, I know your Uni-fence works like mine. That converted Uni-T-Fence is working out great for me on my saw and 36" was a good working fit! I keep that fence on my saw most of the time. It was well worth the investment and time converting it over to mine.


----------



## Jerry Bowen (Jun 25, 2011)

MAFoElffen said:


> Good to hear you came through that okay and that you can learn from that unscatched.
> 
> You know... If it did tweak that blade, a sharpening shop could have straightened and re-tensioned it.
> 
> ...



I'm not sure why Dick thought that the blade got warped, maybe it did, but it was after the kick back that I did the run out measurement with the dial caliper, seems like if the blade was warped that the error that of .003" would not have been possible, but I don't know since I was not running the indicator on the arbor like I should have been doing.

Jerry

\


----------



## Dmeadows (Jun 28, 2011)

Jerry Bowen said:


> Mike,
> . I am not argueing, just saying that I think what happens is that if the piece I question would for some reason remain where is was when the cut was finished that the odds are that it would be ok.
> 
> Jerry


I guess my question is,, Do you really want to "play odds" with a machine that can throw boards at you at 100MPH? Or, How many times do you have to try in order to "beat the odds"? The answer of course, is once! Once is all it takes! Kinda like playing Russian roulette!


----------



## Willway (Aug 16, 2012)

I don't cut a lot of thin strips, but when I have to a thin rip jig in the miter slot is my choice of doing that. I think one of Jerry's problems with using the fence and the miter gauge is 'Griptite Magnetic Featherboard' and the metal plate on the fence that goes with it. The metal plate on his fence is about 6" high, which makes clamping a PITA. This is very easy to overcome with a single 'Magswitch' and a piece of MDF. This short video may help him to visualize what he is being told to do. It is easy to adapt this to use a single Magswitch to use with this type of block on his fence for repetitive cuts.

Safe Cross Cutting using the Rip Fence - YouTube

Magswitch MAGJIG 95 MagJig 95 Magswitch - Amazon.com


----------



## MAFoElffen (Jun 8, 2012)

Jerry Bowen said:


> I'm not sure why Dick thought that the blade got warped, maybe it did, but it was after the kick back that I did the run out measurement with the dial caliper, seems like if the blade was warped that the error that of .003" would not have been possible, but I don't know since I was not running the indicator on the arbor like I should have been doing.
> 
> Jerry


Agreed. If that blade is measuring r.o. of 0.003" at 9" out, there is negligible r.o. in that blade.


----------



## Jerry Bowen (Jun 25, 2011)

Willway said:


> I don't cut a lot of thin strips, but when I have to a thin rip jig in the miter slot is my choice of doing that. I think one of Jerry's problems with using the fence and the miter gauge is 'Griptite Magnetic Featherboard' and the metal plate on the fence that goes with it. The metal plate on his fence is about 6" high, which makes clamping a PITA. This is very easy to overcome with a single 'Magswitch' and a piece of MDF. This short video may help him to visualize what he is being told to do. It is easy to adapt this to use a single Magswitch to use with this type of block on his fence for repetitive cuts.
> 
> Safe Cross Cutting using the Rip Fence - YouTube
> 
> Magswitch MAGJIG 95 MagJig 95 Magswitch - Amazon.com



Dick,
I understand and have used the spacer block, what I was trying explain earlier is what I was doing before I was warned about the problem being discussed. Right now I either use the spacer block, (my name for it) or the Incra Express Sled, I need to study the micro switch a m jig yet, to get the drift of how it is used.

The kick back that I had the other day, as I said above, is a perfect example of the danger being discussed.  My point about the teeth on the saw being the culprit, in my opinion anyway, is still what causes or could cause 90% of any kick backs resulting from the using this unsafe procedeure. If the part being cut off just lays between the fende and the blade where there are no teeth it could twist and bind but the odds very much against it happening, however, this is no place to play the odds when safer solutions are so readily available..

Jerry


----------



## Cherryville Chuck (Sep 28, 2010)

Jerry Bowen said:


> Dick,
> however, this is no place to play the odds when safer solutions are so readily available..
> 
> Jerry


It's good to see you come around on the safety issue Jerry. I spent many years hiking around the bush (forest) with a chainsaw cutting trees down. Workers Comp used to tell all of us that falling trees was more dangerous than bomb disposal according to statistics. In the 70s 50-55 men a year died doing it in British Columbia. I don't know very many that did that job who haven't been injured seriously, myself included, and I knew a few that didn't make it. If you ask any of us about how we were injured and all of us will tell you that we were doing something we knew better than to do. If you always do something the safest way you can, you'll be back in the shop tomorrow making more sawdust. It took me a lot of years to get smart but it's the only way I operate now.

On another note, I seem to recall you saying that you set the cursor on your LS by making a cut and checking it with a caliper. It dawned on me that this could be a problem since, I assume, you measure your woodworking with a tape measure. If you measure your woodworking with a tape measure then you should also zero out the cursor using the same measure. There is no guarantee that the measure will be the same as the caliper.


----------



## MAFoElffen (Jun 8, 2012)

Willway said:


> I don't cut a lot of thin strips, but when I have to a thin rip jig in the miter slot is my choice of doing that...


I don't own a "thin rip gauge"... but I use the same principles and techniques with what I do have. Just as I cross-over techniques, tools and skills to other things. 

This may sound strange-
I use my Table Saws a lot. Much more than I did when I was working out on jobsites. Why? Because it's already there and already set up. 

I use my rip fences maybe 25% of the time I'm using my saw. Mostly when I'm roughing out timbers (after creating a jointer'ed cut to go against it). Most of the time the rip fence is sitting out 53" right, out of the my way. That is a little different perspective than only using your table saw with the rip fence. From that perspective, someone that is only using the rip fence is wasting 75% of the capabilities of that saw... right? That was when I used mostly a traditional North American saw with miter slots.

On traditional Cabinet Saws, I used "techniques" on rip fences, miter slot attached crosscut fences, miter gauges and crosscut sleds that I learned along the way and still use today on slightly different equipment. 

Now I use "2-axis" movable rip fences and crosscut fences. I use stop blocks on my fences. I have 2-axis movable fences that some call a parallel fence or a Palin. All a Palin is, is basically is is a measurable type of block, stop or a point that rests against the work/ that you move the work to before a cut. Most all still are DIY. I try to watch my pennies (But they are still quality, fully functional and safe.)

Basically, all a thin-rip gauge is- a "stop." When I mentioned using a "thin rip gauge" with a miter gauge or sled, that would have been extending it's published "specific" use for cutting thin strips, and using it as a specifically just as a crosscut stop with the rip fence moved out of the way (right). That way as you are starting the cut, you move it against that stop (to the the gauge or stop block), then hold it/ support it to or against your miter gauge fence, it brushes against that stop, but leaves contact of it as it finishes the cut. A stop used in that way, doesn't have to be for thin strips and the work is not trapped between anything and the blade plate.

I do end up cutting a lot of thin hardwood strips as banding material for use in veneered cabinetry... which I then put through my planner in a DIY thin strip planer jig (Just a board with a 13/16 wide slot routed in it)... I like doing that instead of using band edge tape. I think it lasts longer and looks better. I use the same techniques cutting them as (if I was to use a "thin strip gauge"), but I don't own a jig specially for cutting thin strips.

Does that make sense? Just trying to share my experience and ideas...


----------



## Jerry Bowen (Jun 25, 2011)

MAFoElffen said:


> I don't own a "thin rip gauge"... but I use the same principles and techniques with what I do have. Just as I cross-over techniques, tools and skills to other things.
> 
> This may sound strange-
> I use my Table Saws a lot. Much more than I did when I was working out on jobsites. Why? Because it's already there and already set up.
> ...


Mike,
For the most part I do understand about 90% of what you are describing. When it comes to making thin strips, and I don't do it often, is to cut them on the left side of the blade, this would be true with anything up about an inch wide. If you have not watched Mark Mueller's demo on the TS LS system you might want to but I suspect you have seenit and if not you understand what I talking about. You fellas with years of experience know about so much that is just plain Greek to me, like I have said before, many of you have forgotten more about woodworking than I will ever know, but you just will never enjoy the work more than I do with my limited knowledge, I have the advantage of being able to learn so much more than you do, and learning is really the fun part of it, or at least a lot of the fun for now. I have been at it for four years now and still have all of my fingers and have not had any serious accident yet. Hope I can say that in four years from now.

I do want you know how much I sincerely appreciate your taking time write to me about what you are doing and explaining things like you do. I have learned so much from you and others with the years of experience. 

Right now I am working on an idea, in my head that is, for a jig that will allow me to drill the holes for very small hinges for small jewelry boxes. The self centering bit that I have are just to large for the small holes. I won't take the time to try explain what I have in mind but if it works and if I get it made, one can drill all eight holes for both hinges in just a coupld of minutes and they will be perfectly centered, straight and the screws will seat perfectly in their recesses. The holes will be cut before the top is cut off. The recesses for the leaves of the hinges will have to be mortised after the lid is cut off, but using stops on the fence of the router table will make that jobe fairly simple. So far, this has been a challenge and is of course the reason for the need of the jig. Hope it works as well in reality as it looks like in my imagination. I'll be in touch.

Jerry


----------



## MAFoElffen (Jun 8, 2012)

LOL. Thank you very much.

No matter how much you think I know, No matter how much I have been lucky enough to be exposed to, I am also still learning and having fun at it. Don't you worry, I am not missing out.

That is the journey...


----------

