More width Shaker trestle table - bad idea?

[Ken Platt]

Folks - My wife has tasked me to make a new dining table, and selected the Shaker trestle table from the plans in FWW #193. However, she'd like the top wider than the plan calls for, from 36 inches wide to at least 40 inches wide.

I am concerned that this will be too hard on the post/cleat joint. You can't tell from the pic, but the under table cleat joins the post in what I think is called a saddle or bridle joint. I was wondering if anyone has made this table or similar and could comment on how problematic it is to increase the width.

Thanks,

Ken

[Martin Shupe]

If this is the one by Chris Becksvoort, it is probably stong enough for an extra 4 inches in width.

It is on my list of things to build. (A very long list.)

[Rob Fisher]

You could always do a double upright as well. It would change the design a bit, but I am sure it could be designed to look good. Or one larger (wider upright) although I am not sure how this would look.

Rob

[Jim Becker]

I agree with Martin...adding 2" on each side isn't going to significantly stress this project. If anything, you could also adjust the width of the feet proportionally to add some stability, but even without that, I doubt there will be an issue. If you'd be more comfortable, increase the thickness of the cleat slightly...it will not be noticeable and make that component just a little stiffer.

[Sean Nagle]

I would modify the arched feet such that the radius was 2" greater. I think the proportions would be better for the wider top as well.

I'm actually building a trestle dining table right now that I've modified from the original FWW plan. IIRC the original tabletop width was 36" or 37". I'm building a 42" wide top. 42". I modified the plan to incorporate two posts and beams instead of one and lengthened the sled feet by 6".

[Ken Platt]

And they sent it on to Christian Becksvoort, who was nice enough to email me back. He said he'd built that table as wide as 40", but wouldn't make it any wider than that for both structural and aesthetic reasons. To do the 40" top, he lengthened the cleats and feet and made the posts a bit bigger diameter.

So it looked pretty doable, until I made a cardboard mockup of the anticipated top size (40 x 90), put it in the place where the table will go, and my wife felt she really wanted something a few inches wider, like maybe 45".

So now I'm looking at making a hayrake table, essentially a Stickley trestle table with the trestle end pulled back a bit to make a V shape. PWW has a plan online. I'm sure I'll be posting some questions on that soon. Thanks all.

Ken