Printable View
Looking at 42" wide rustic dining table options. At that width, twin uprights generally recommended for a traditional trestle table, so I'm looking for other options. I've only found one article on sawbuck table (x shaped trestle ends) with no mention of maximum recommended width of the X. As width increases, the angle between the two legs increases, and seems like there should be a limit before longevity is threatened. Any input would be greatly appreciated.
You really want a dining table that looks like a picnic table? What's wrong with twin uprights on the trestle?
I think there's a photo of a Shaker Sawbuck table but I couldn't tell you where. It would seem to me that as the table gets larger the two pieces of the sawbuck would get wider to provide more strength.
I'd much prefer a Shaker style trestle table to a sawbuck table for a dining room but you're certainly free to build whatever you want.
Thank you for your replies. In this economy, though, I cannot tell a potential customer a sawbuck table is not attractive. I was looking for guidelines on how wide such a base could be made, so I'll try other options.
Hi Don,
I wouldn't say there are too many hard and fast rules with sawbuck tables. There are some limitations with the height of the table and the X of the legs, I think a full size mockup wil be your best assest to nail down aesthetics and design. Personally, I shy away from the X being to squared such as height equalling width, as well as overly wide or narrow as well. You can also vary where the leg members cross. My folks have a wonderful example of an antique sawbuck table that I grew up with, and still find the design attractive with its low dovetailed stretchers and utilitarian shelf just under the table. It will be the subtle details which will bring this style away from the "picnic table" look. Try a google image search and try and find images of actual antiques for some design ques.
Enjoy the project,
James