Woodenspoke

Looks like a plan sounds like a plan, but something in the back of my head says its too good to be true and why isn't SM selling them already for double the price. Have you tried them yet if so do you have pictures of the process. I would like to see the results first before I am convinced. If it does what you say I will be a true believer. Woodenspoke Seeing is believing.

Drummerdude you have more balls than I do to put a fostner bit in a router. My hats off to you. With regard to router speed, using a large bit in the router requires you to reduce the speed for your own safety. I have never heard if anyone needing to change speeds on a straight bit, only door panel raising bits that are 2+ inches wide and similar over sized bits. Plus with a bit this size you need 2 1/2-3hp or more and the router is usually equipped with a speed dial. Yes they sell router speed controller's juts like Drummerdudes setup Woodenspoke

I assume everyone is using 1/2 " shank 3/4" width pattern bit, to break one you need to be a monster. But I am one for always assuming. Even with a 1/4" shank bit your bit diameter should be a minimum of 1/2" and they are hard to break. I would only worry about breakage on bits 1/4" in width or less. I have broken my share of bits and most of them were in the 1/8" range but never have I busted a 1/2 " width bit or larger. I have destroyed edges but that was on particle board and is not guitar related story. We are talking here about internal pickup routing, a mistake will not be a disaster unless you make a huge one. If you cut out an area which needs a screw glue in another piece of wood it will all be covered by hardware or a pickguard. Pattern routing depends on two factors the guide plate height and the depth of the bit, and we are talking about a shank mounted bearing, pattern bit. To route a 2" hole for example you need to remove enough wood to get the guide flush with the pattern, use a fostner bit use the technique Mattia and I already mentioned. The next pass is the same only you dont need the pattern you are using the perfect hole you just routed as the guide. 1" deep pattern bit, 2 passes, 2" deep. people who are mentioning 1/8" depth of cuts are doing the same thing. they cant hit the pattern until they remove enough wood so the guide is flush. Its easier and faster to use a drill press or hand drill and the fostner bit just dont try and get too close to the pattern its to remove wood only. Another pattern routing example on the outside edge of the body. You bandsaw out the shape and leave a 1/16th of an inch overlap. You double stick tape the pattern to the body. You buy a big honking top mounted pattern bit and take a 1/6" deep 1 3/4" high pass all around the body. Its a one pass job and unless you bought a cheapo bit or your router is a piece of garbage the router will move through the cut like butter. Its the same principle but internal routing requires you to make the 1/16" passes using your eyes and brain Dont take this the wrong way but speed does not equal a better cut. Just use the right bit for the job the better the quality of the bit the better the cut, most mid size routers are not variable speed so the speed part confuses me. Woodenspoke

I agree with Mattia, hog out the wood with a fostner bit then pattern route using the template (a new template). What people here have not said is you can take shallow cuts using the whole lenght of as router bit moved in a circular motion (CW direction internal pattern only). No you dont want to just plow through a thick piece of wood in one pass without open space around the bit, a fostner bit provides this space. This technique is not hard to master and fostner bits are dirt cheap. the fostner bit will not leave a perfect surface but the router bit will slowly remove all the pointy edges left by the bit. Sorry I dont think it came out exactly they way I wanted to describe it but I'm tired of rewriting it. Hope it make sense. Whiteside makes the best bits I have ever used, they are worth every penny. I wish I knew that when I first started buying bits. Woodenspoke

Thanks Doc for the review, I'll put that little sucker on the list of tools I dont own and have to buy. I really would like a small belt sander for those odd jobs. I also have a Bosch 4 x 24 which I have had no problems with. But I have a vac hose for the Porter Cable to connect to a small shop vac so I use the PC when I reach for a belt sander. One other tidbit of advice when I buy a tool I look for industrial quality, costs more but lasts longer (or forever in my case) and usually does a better job. However if I expect to use the tool occasionally I will look on Amazon for a refurbished unit first. Of course if the price is almost the same as a new one I will buy the new one. (Boring shop moment)I worked in a shop once where the owner would only buy Ryobi hand drills, it drove me crazy. I kept telling him the drills are made for home owners and the gears are plastic not metal and he needs production grade tools. All he could see was the price tag, we replaced a lot of drills, and it cost him more than if he had just bought a few good Dewalt drills in the first place. As far as I know he is still using Ryobi drills. I call it math for the moment. From my HS physics teacher "garbage in garbage out". Seems to apply to a lot more than physics and it's the only thing I remember from his class. Where were we; oh yea belt sanders! Woodenspoke

here is a less expensive stand, Sorry the plan was just a quick drawing so no dimensions. The Craftsman, I feel like I should put on six shooter and play some spaghetti western music. Watch out boys here comes the Craftsman,. Thanks for the label I find it amusing, you made my day. Woodenspoke

Well at least you figured it out, took longer than most folks but a lesson learned is a lesson learned? Or some crap like that. Dont feel so bad everyone at some point puts on a blade backwards. You also assume the guy on the other end didn't twist it when he folded it up or didn't welded it with the teeth pointing in the wrong direction. Doesn't effect the weld just the orientation of the teeth. I admit I have put blades on backwards too Shhhh dont tell anyone. Woodenspoke.

I dont think my Porter Cable can be clamped to anything so you lucked out with the skill. Jon 100-200 sheets of plexi. If your talking about 4 x 8 hey sell it on eBay (pickup only) and then buy some wood for your projects. Tell your dad there was an accident with a heat gun and it melted. Just messing around. Thats a lot of plexi even if it isn't a full sheet. If it's 1/4 inch your set for template life. If you use pattern bits in your router as I do(a large bit) then 1/8 is a tad thin for the bearing to ride along safely. Yes a drum sander is easier to control and if its for doing the side of a body thats the way to go. If you can splurge on one with a bottom guide you can save a lot of grief and make a template like Jon did, then its just making sure you contact the template with the disk sander guide no real skill needed, Ok a little skill. Its the template you have to take time to make. Dont forget double sided tape made for holding wood to a template would help. Woodenspoke

wow First I have one of these saws. In the horizontal position the blade runs from left to right if you are standing on the cutting side of the saw. This would also be the same direction with the blade moving down into the table if it were attached. Or with the machine open in the vertical posistion the motor drives the blade clockwise. If all this is true than you have to flip the blade. Just like if you put your belt on inside out, or like flipping a rubber band inside out, same principle. These saws come pre wired so I find it hard to believe its the motor, but you never know. Fliping a band saw blade requires you to twist the blade so the inside face of the blade is now the outside face if this helps. Its also a little harder than flipping a rubber band. Not all blades come in the correct posistion from the factory and some have to be flipped. One other thing of you have been running this blade that way for awhile it may already be toast. Woodenspoke

Its always good to have the rubber block on hand to extend the life of any belt. Thanks for the link Jon never saw a block that cheap before. These rubber blocks last forever so dont buy too many (like one). The 120 grit is fine if you are doing minimal stock removal but if you want to remove wood in a hurry stick to 60 or 80 grit. You always have to weigh in on many factors when choosing a belt. My reference grits were for fast stock removal, and if that wasn't your intention, Jon is right then go with 120 but not finer. You may also have to start with a course grit to remove the marks when using your finishing sander (or block) so take that into account as additional work. Nice pattern by the way Jon, belt sander who would have believed it could be done. One note I do not use plexi due to its high cost but use 1/2" MDF and then epoxy the edges it helps harden the MDF and fill any of those you know "mistakes" no one ever makes. Plus my guide bearings on my router's pattern bit has a larger area to run on, and you can always add more epoxy to touch it up. Woodenspoke

Hand held belt sanders For a body the smaller the better and I do believe Porter cable makes a single hand held model now, slightly larger than a random orbit sander. If its just you dont feel a palm sander is fast enough this may work for you. But if its removing wood in quantity a 3" x 21" is the standard choice and size. Just make sure you dont buy belts from Harbor Freight, my belts lasted all of 1 minute before the glue failed and the belt separated. I was not working on guitars at the time. If you need to hog off wood buy zirconia belts. the minimum grit I would recommend is 60 any lower and you will be sanding forever to remove the marks, 80 grit would be a better choice for general leveling. The best you can do with a belt sander it take off enough wood to get you where you need to be to do a good final leveling job and finish sanding using other tools. The other issue is you must be in constant motion using a belt sander. Its not hard to master a belt sander just remember its a wood eating monster dont stop or it keeps eating and dont work across the grain. Dust collection is helpful unless you dont mind dust clouds. The newest belt sander craze is a lower center of gravity motor, but if your on a budget than forget it. A 4" x 24" is overkill for instrument work. I hope this info helps Woodenspoke

Well professor, if we look back, my first post does something few have done...I answered the asked question. Then I posted that I didn't get the "Snotty Attitudes", really not directly insulting anyone, simply I wasn't a fan of "The Snotty Attitudes". Woodenspoke responded by calling me an idiot...game on. Still with me? Still sure who started the name calling? Neither here nor there...a bunch of people passing judgment on something they've NEVER USED...STOP THE PRESSES. I was really hoping to stay out this. Why does my name keep coming up for defending a remark directed at me. So I have hundred of dollars invested in equipment aimed at doing good fret work. I wonder if thats a crime in my state? Just refer to me as Mr SATO "Snotty Attitude Tool Owner". As far as this topic goes how many times can you run over it with the truck before it's officially called road kill. Mr SATO Woodenspoke

For once I feel like I got off easy on this post, relief at last. Woodenspoke

kahuna the only snotty nosed idiot here is you if you are defending this kit, which only purpose is to take a few bucks out of some poor unsuspecting saps wallet and possibly do more damage than good to his instrument. But you must be an expert right? So it worked for a few garbage guitars you own, but its not the point. I dont tout my skills as other do I was pointing out how someone with knowledge would properly work on a fret booard and yes its not cheap if you want to do it properly and it takes skill. Soapbarstrat has hundreds of fret jobs under his belt and twice the tooling I do, but he is kind enough to just point to a review thats says the same thing I have been saying all along. Maybe all this forum is able to handle is one line replys, so here it is "dont buy this kit" kahuna so you spent the money but you can also use it to finish your furniture, scale fish, scrape your toes, remove corns on the bottom of your feet and most of all sand down your attitude problem. Maybe your money would have been better spent learning more about Luthery like buy a book on the subject. Its obvious you were the targeted buyer for this kit. Woodenspoke

If you increase the height of the strings you in effect change the length of the string from point a to point b thats a fact, it's basic geometry, and therefore there is change in tension on the neck. So use the kit, frankly it's your guitar and not mine. But if you screw up your frets dont blame me. Good Luck Woodenspoke Well, as I already said-- the kit itself doesn't seem so great, so I won't be using it. But you already admitted that you don't have a degree in physics, so you are missing some very fundamental points here. Tension is not dependent on length, which is why this is a matter of physics and not of geometry. You can have a distance from point a to point b of 20, and on another object a distance from point x to point y of 40, twice as long. But you can still have a tensionable object (in this case, a guitar string) set to the same tension no matter what the distance is. Furthermore, in this specific case, you can prove that the tension hasn't changed by the very thing you're asked to do-- tune the string. The string MUST be a specific tension across a specific distance in order to ring the right note. The specific distance (from nut to bridge) hasn't really changed. In order for the strings to produce the same note (tuning to pitch), they MUST by the laws of physics, be under the EXACT SAME amount of tension. ;-) Not only that, but the part whose distance has changed (from nut to tuning post) has the same tension, too, because tension gets distributed equally across the string. What DOES change is the amount of 'material' (eg. the physical string itself) across which tension gets distributed. This becomes a factor in string-bending techniques, etc... but in a static model like this one, that's a moot point. Now, the tension MUST get distributed in a slightly different way as the "jack" gets taller because it's load-bearing. Imagine that jack being 2 feet tall... it's not likely going to even stand properly, nevermind cause a neck to have the same amount of bend; however, in the case of this kit, it wouldn't be a factor because it's only what... a centimetre tall? It's not an influence at all. No need to get upset. You had a valid theory. It seems intuitive to many people that things like headstock angle or in this case nut height, are things that affect tension. But they are not. There's nothing wrong with your perfectly reasonable conclusion, but it's the wrong one. I just happen to be the person telling you that it's not the "lifting the strings" idea that makes this kit less than perfect. To me, it's the other things mentioned already-- particularly the way the frets are "crowned" by the little device. It actually seems to just round off the frets and not truly crown them at all. Greg I just built myself a neck jig based on the Stumac model, costs over $120 in materials. I have hundreds of dollars in fret tooling most of which was bought from Stumac including a straight edge leveling bar radius blocks files,etc.. etc. I made the jig because it was they proper way to work on a neck. The basics of the jig is to place the neck into the position it would normally be in when it is at tension without the strings attached. I am more interested now in making my guitars play better. Lets call it this great fret leveler kit which we all agree is not worth the money "The Ronco fret fixer" and have some Aussie sell it on American TV (no offense to our Aussie members). Until we get a physics professor to end this stand off I stand by my statement. woodenspoke

If you increase the height of the strings you in effect change the lenght of the string from point a to point b thats a fact, it's basic geometry, and therefore there is change in tension on the neck. So use the kit, frankly it's your guitar and not mine. But if you screw up your frets dont blame me. Good Luck woodenspoke

I am certainly not a physics professor but even with the guitar tuned you have changed the point of tuning by raising the string height over the nut. My believe is you will change some factor (tension plus or minus) required to tune the instrument. You have created a longer string length and also a higher angle and increased distance from the tuners to the nut. I cant do the math but the whole idea seems like a disaster awaiting your guitar. If someone has this kit and a friend with the Stumac Neck setting Jig i(or just the same sized shim) t would be a good experiment to see what really happens if you raise the strings and tune it up. Woodenspoke

But I like trouble seems to keep people honest. Unfortunately people just tell you what they use which is not advice but a self indulgent pat on the back that their tool selection was the best choice. If you had problems with the flat bottom spoke shave just imagine what would have happened if you used some the the more advanced shaves mentioned. Wood, its all about wood but that never enters into the conversation because everyone is fixated on the tool and not the process. Each neck is unique (wood selection and grain) and because of that tool selection is an adaptable process. I believe I answered your question with the utmost respect, The newbie came from the "newbie under your name in the first post" and wasn't a comment on you or your skills. My frustration comes not from you but the idiotic advice I see given to people who want to get started building guitars. Advice which will turn them from wannabes to I'll just buy my next guitar. I have answered your posts before and I am always honest and try to keep my personal preferences out of the conversation, and I dont bring up my long history of woodworking to back up my advise. If I knew you could afford to spend the week fly fishing I would have recommended a Lie Nielson. If your first post was any indication of the frustration you have with the answers you get I am equally frustrated at having my advise ignored. My mantra over the years seems to be "I told you so". I told my neighbors 3 years ago not to use stain on their siding, now 3 years later the house looks like crap. So now they have to spend another 5 grand to repaint the house. Its the same on this forum we discuss $200 bandsaws but that $200 would have been better spent towards a $500 bandsaw because that $200 piece of junk is going to become a burden if you stick with the hobby. If you deceide you dont want to build guitars you will at least get a better resale value on the $500 bandsaw. Most of my woodworking skills I learned by trial and error, and books. there were no help forums (or internet) when I started building guitars. Use what you feel comfortable with to remove wood. Yes I appreciate your reply makes me feel someone is reading the posts and I dont mind a kick in the pants either. Woodenspoke

the guitar was a prototype I scraped before I finished it. It only has finish on it because I was testing some water based lacquer I bought. I forgot the exact reason why I scraped it but I believe the heel did not come out the way I wanted. Some day I will remove the truss rod to recover some of my costs and use the rest to warm my toes by the fire. For now it has become a test body to abuse. I'm testing the pads over several days in the jig to see if they mar the finish. Pads used for stopping furniture from moving on a wood floor. I will be adding the leather cross brackets from the Jig video in the near future. Woodenspoke

I read a review of this kit, looks like a waste of money. If it dosent take in to account the radius of the fret board, and I saw no such infornation about radius in the review, you are just sanding a fret level and not level to the radius of the fret board. Your money would be better spent on a radius block and a 3 corner fret file. FYI: when you jack up the strings at the nut you add additional pressures (bend) to the neck. the whole idea of this kit makes no sense. Woodenspoke

Well its been a few weeks and no one stepped forward to assist me. I did what everyone does make the best of it from pictures and videos I was provided. Also got some excellent support from a few friends I've made on this forum who checked my detailed CAD plans and made excellent comments. I figured I'd follow up on the post since I no longer need assistance as you can see. The Stumac chart would be nice but is not really that important now. Thanks to those who kept the faith and voiced their support for the free exchange of information. I do not have a base yet; probably will just order the Stumac base and a cheaper vice from somewhere like Enco. I still have a few accessories to make. The body was strapped in for the pictures only. I did build the Surrogate body not shown from the plans provided by Stumac. The indicator supports were modded to make the operation a whole lot simpler; besides using a bent table leg lag bolt seemed cheesy to me anyway, but I dont want to give away any secrets to Stumac now do I, Ha Ha. Woodenspoke

Buy one according to your needs. If you never plan on resawing, there isn't much of a need to get one with 8"+ resaw. I think mine was in the $280 range. Unfortunately the price range on a good bandsaw is well beyond the means of most members of this forum. I started with a 12" Sears in the late 70's upgraded to an 18" Grizzly(older American C Frame type) in the early 80's, and finally bit the bullet and bought an 18" Laguna which comes standard with a 4.5HP baldor motor. The motor alone weighs more than my original sears 12" bandsaw. Yes the store brands are fine and will do the job maybe even some of the new grizzly European models will be a decent buy but they are lighter than the higher end Minimax or Laguna saws and the motors are smaller. The question on this form is always what is the best cheapest brand I can get and not what is the best bandsaw I can buy. What to look for in a good bandsaw regardless of price and I suggest everyone takes this information to heart Welded European frame makes a more rigid machine, the more rigid the more precise Cast balanced wheels made of iron not aluminum, I repeat not aluminum 1HP motor, 1 1/2 HP + is even better If two look identical and cost the same buy the heaver model, weight equals stability and stability equals precision. buy a saw which uses standard sized blades, i repeat buy a saw which uses standard sized blades. Woodenspoke

Yes I am believing my time could be better utilized doing other things like watching TV with my family rather than answer questions. I am a member of other forums such as the CNCzone where there is active dialog and people are willing to go out of there way to help others. MIMF was such a forum once. I'm sorry I moved this post in the wrong direction. I wonder if I should have mentioned a draw knife as the only tool for the job, HA HA. Rich, I didn't mean that using a concave spoke shave was useless or that any particular brand would not work. I did not say you could profile a neck on both sides with a spokeshave in one stroke, it would be nice yet impossible. I did mentioned 2 dimensions vertical and horizontal (on a single side of the neck and I did say I was tired and I hoped it made sense) could cause tearout which you cant control by just reversing direction (taking a full stroke across the blade)as you could with a flat spokeshave. My personal experience is the Hock concave profiled spokeshave comes close but not close enough for me to purchase one. The Lee Valley in the picture has a very tight concave 1 5/16" profile and I believe they state it is made for chair rails and boat oars and unless you are building chairs or a boat oar, $95 is a bit too much to spend on a tool that may be unsuited to the job. I had no problem with the round bottom spokeshave and it looks nice but requires more skill to use so I would not rcommend it for Buckradius. One of the biggest issues here is newbies just want to build guitars, but building guitars is woodworking. Most would be better off spending a few bucks on a book on honing basic woodworking skills first. My personal preference on necks is to hog off as much wood with a foredom tool fitted with a carbide rasp, which is certainly not recommended for everyone. But I also use a pattern makers rasp, flat spoke shave as well as several scrapers, concaved and straight. I even believed I tried a draw knife once (not recommended). But again the question was "what should I buy" not what do you use. An my answer is the same, buy a flat bottom spokeshave as your first spokeshave and it will work great for shaping a neck. Woodenspoke

If you are an experienced woodworker a round bottom spoke shave would work fine in many situations and as a fine addition to a flat bottom shave. For a beginner I would not recommend a round bottom spokeshave. That concave spoke shave in the picture is totally unsuited for a neck. Look if the guy is a beginner stop recommending advanced tools for him to buy. Of course he asked for advice; at the same time berated some people for not giving advice but wasting forum space (which I agree with) but buckradius you have not even had the courtesy to reply to any of our posts, whats with that? "Hey buck dont be a schmuck". The reason you only get people with limited experience posting here is because there is no real dialog in any post on this forum and by not answering the people who have spent time with your question you have contributed to the very reason this form has a lot of useless advice. People like myself with many years of experience just stop posting because its no longer a learning experience for us either, nor is there any reason to pass down information to newbies who give no indication or positive response that the information is being used. In effect you are causing the very situation you wanted to avoid. You might as well move over to the highly censored MIMF and get some real advice, just dont post any new ideas there or they may wind up in the next edition of the Stumac catalog. Woodenspoke

I concur with the sharpening point. It is not easy to sharpen a curved blade, and even though people have the curved spoke shaves mentioned I am not sure how far you can take the job with these models, I will bet you they also use a flat bladed spoke shave when the real shaping begins. Just owning one does not make it the tool of choice. IMPORTANT CONSIDERATION With a flat Bladed model your are taking 1/4" shavings (APPOX) at a time, with the round shave it may take double or triple the amount of wood off at a time in two dimensions (top and side). If your neck grain changes direction in either one of those dimensions you may cause tear out using the curved blade and if you reverse the direction in a piece like this you tear out the other dimension. With a straight blade you are working only in one dimension (top or side but not both) and can reverse direction of cut to eliminate tearout. Its late I hope this makes sense. Guitar building is woodworking plain and simple, tool selection is only one piece of the equation. Stick with a straight spoke shave of higher quality and you will be glad you did and your woodworking skills will be better for if you are a beginner.