Page 1 of 10 12345 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 141

Thread: Is the Klausz-Frid-Scand Bench Dead?

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    N. Idaho
    Posts
    1,621

    Is the Klausz-Frid-Scand Bench Dead?

    Hello all,

    Someone noted that everybody loves a thread on building a bench (just like you can't have too many clamps?). I'm planning to migrate this thread to SMC:
    http:// forums.finewoodworking.com/fi...and-bench-dead
    (Remove the space after // when copying into your browser.)

    I'll continue updates here as i make progress, slow as it might be.

    Cheers,
    Chris C.
    Last edited by Bruce Page; 07-22-2011 at 11:35 PM. Reason: Removed active link. • Links to other public or private forums is not allowed per the TOS.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    savannah
    Posts
    1,102
    I don't think it's dead, I think it's just too complicated for most of us building our first bench...especially building it with only hand tools, even though that's the way they were built for centuries. It's actually not that complicated, but if you look at all the dovetails, moving parts, splines and careful planning, it seems like a daunting task.

    I just put the finishing touches on my Holtz-ominy bench and I'm loving it...but the scandanavian bench is still a goal of mine. One of these days I would love to make a hardwood scandinavian bench with wooden vise screws, a traditional tail vise, and tusk tenoned stretchers...but that's out of my price range, time constraints, and experience level. It's also pure desire, not need, on my part. I don't think that style of bench is superior...it just looks so dang cool.
    Last edited by john brenton; 07-21-2011 at 12:53 PM.
    It's sufficiently stout..


  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    A suburb of Los Angeles California
    Posts
    644
    It'll be nice to have this build thread here.

    I saw, but didn't post on the other thread. The KFS bench isn't dead, but every bench design involves trade-offs.
    The KFS is ready to go for dovetailing (no clamping on your Moxon), but the shoulder vise does get in the way if
    you're using handplanes to dimension longer stock. With more of us using handplanes to dimension stock, we're not
    as willing to give up the last couple feet of the bench.
    AKA - "The human termite"

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Longview WA
    Posts
    27,312
    Blog Entries
    1
    One often heard phrase comes to mind, "it takes a bench to build a bench."

    Another phrase that should be heard, "it takes using a bench to know what one wants from their bench."

    After a few years of using the same Sjöberg bench my desires are much better known.

    One of the things I like most about my bench is the ability to remove the vise quickly.

    Ways to overcome those things not liked about my bench are being considered and will be incorporated into my bench build.

    The shoulder vise doesn't appeal to me since I often plane boards that are longer than my bench. A shoulder vise would make that very difficult. There are also times when my face vise is used to hold a piece of wood to be sawn at a point beyond the bench. Of course, different methods could be used for these tasks.

    In my opinion, a bench should expand abilities, not limit them.

    jtk
    "A pessimist sees the difficulty in every opportunity; an optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty."
    - Sir Winston Churchill (1874-1965)

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Posts
    2,854
    Quote Originally Posted by Christopher Charles View Post
    Hello all,

    Someone noted that everybody loves a thread on building a bench (just like you can't have too many clamps?). I'm planning to migrate this thread to SMC:

    http:// forums.finewoodworking.com/fine-woodworking-knots/hand-tools/klausz-frid-scand-bench-dead

    I'll continue updates here as i make progress, slow as it might be.

    Cheers,
    Chris C.
    It might be worth noting that a "traditional northern european bench" isn't really what most folks think of. What is now thought of as the above is actually a traditional eurpean design that has been heavily modified to use less material and be faster to manufacture with machines (and therefore cheaper). It's debateable if those "improvements" actually benefit the woodworker rather than the manufacturer/retailer.
    Last edited by Bruce Page; 08-09-2011 at 5:04 PM.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Trinity County California
    Posts
    729
    I was nearing the completion of a Scandinavian (Klausz-Frid) bench. 1990 plans from WoodCraft. Very stout bench. Got the base mortised & tenon done out of soft maple. The top is 8/8 European Beech. Already laminated. Two years ago when I read the series of stories in Popular Woodworking by Christopher Schwarz I stopped dead in my tracks. Sold the top, am scrapping the base, and the Veritas Face and Tail vises will be on eBay within a month.

    I already made the mistake of buying a Sliding Tablesaw because I didn't match the task to the tool. Hell, I'm a hobbyist. And I like handtools and working at a bench. So I'll build the Ruobo bench from scratch. With a Wagon Vise and Leg Vise and Deadman. Schwarz beautifully breaks down all the varied tasks performed at a workbench. I won't be engaged in more than 40-50% of the jobs he itemizes, but it is clear from reading his book, a Klausz-Frid bench would be useful for only about 15% of those tasks. Some of them quite awkwardly. Moreover, having acquired detailed plans for that bench, some details — particularly mounting a tail vise — had my head spinning.

    The Schwarz book is titled : Workbenches - from Design & Theory. A real eye-opener.

  7. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by Gary Curtis View Post
    Schwarz beautifully breaks down all the varied tasks performed at a workbench. I won't be engaged in more than 40-50% of the jobs he itemizes, but it is clear from reading his book, a Klausz-Frid bench would be useful for only about 15% of those tasks. Some of them quite awkwardly.
    Do you really believe that the Klausz/Frid Scandanavian type bench is only marginally useful for 15% of woodworking tasks? How do you imagine craftsman used these for so many years? How do you imagine a Tage Frid or Frank Klausz managed to make anything using such a bench?

    I've got the lumber, face vise, and tail vise to build a Klausz/Frid bench as my 1st bench and will build it as soon as time permits.

    Nothing wrong with a Roubo style bench, but I have a hard time believing the Klausz/Frid style can possibly be so inadequate.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Trinity County California
    Posts
    729
    Today is Thursday. I always exaggerate on Thursdays. Maybe not 15%. But here's where I was always 'cramped' while working on benches at the shops of friends. The face vise screw and guide rods always stopped me from clamping wide boards horizontally. Same for long boards vertically. And tail vises were useful, but the owners warned me repeatedly not to bang too hard with a chisel at the Tail Vise.

    And the Trestle arrangement didn't make sense. When lots of lumber comes in wide and short dimensions, how do you clamp it to plane the edges? Trestles and recessed legs seem like a missed opportunity if clamping is your objective. Some folks have argued that a Ruobo bench is ideal for milling raw lumber, not furniture making. Perhaps some elaborate clamping is possible on the Scandinavian bench. And I've even tried some of it, but found it excessively time consuming.

  9. #9
    I'm in the planning/financing stages of my first bench build....and it will be a Klausz. I'm attracted to it for its aesthetics as well as it's apparent fit for the work which I do and want to do. It wouldn't be hard to add a sliding deadman to it, or you could build a "slave" such as Klausz uses when working the edges of longer stock.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Madison, WI
    Posts
    345
    I don't understand the hate the various bench styles get. I DO strongly advocate the Roubo design of a thick top with the legs flush to the front. At this point, you have the perfect platform to make it do whatever you want. Leave it as it or put on the vises you want. My base is actually a trestle style, I just made sure to bring the legs out front.

    Mine has a tail (wagon, actually) and leg vice because they were both quick and dirty and let me get it done cheaply. My bench does have endcaps, so it would have been trivial do swap out one for a longer bit and I'd be over halfway to a shoulder vise.

    The one thing I do not get is using a bench slave for longer stock. Pardon the flame-bait, but what I hear when people say stuff like that is, "I'd rather use a crutch just build a bench that actually works better." I speak specifically about legs being flush to the front of the bench.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Houston TX
    Posts
    548
    My bench is a lightweight, derived from a Lervad carver's bench, with a Klaus-style trestle frame under it and a couple hundred pounds of wheelweights as added weight on the lower shelf. The long stretchers are secured with bolts and cross- nuts. It has a full-width tail vise with dual rows of dogs, and a shoulder vise. Edge-planing longer pieces is with the shoulder vise and a clamped-on rest (slave) at the other end. Since I do not do large pieces, it works for me..... a Roubo would not

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    3,178
    What happens when Chris Schwarz has a change of heart and decides that some other bench design is cooler than the Roubo?

    I made a Frid-Klausz style bench around 1982, and then used it professionally for almost twenty-five years making custom furniture; in all that time, I never felt that it didn't serve me well. I was luckier than many here in that I'd already worked at other benches so knew what I wanted, and what I didn't want (e.g. a tool trough).

    The idea, though, that this well-considered and time-tested design will cease to be useful to woodworkers is, frankly, preposterous.
    Last edited by Frank Drew; 07-22-2011 at 12:47 AM.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Tallahassee, FL
    Posts
    722
    I have had this type of bench for years and it works great. Granted, mine is a user made type, not one of the lighter commercially available ones. It will handle almost all of my needs. Larger drawers can sometimes be a problem, but no bench is perfect. My only real wish is that I wish it was about two feet longer, but then I would have to sacrifice space.

  14. #14

    This years colour is puce...

    Quote Originally Posted by Frank Drew View Post
    What happens when Chris Schwarz has a change of heart and decides that some other bench design is cooler than the Roubo?

    I made a Frid-Klausz style bench around 1982, and then used it professionally for almost twenty-five years making custom furniture; in all that time, I never felt that it didn't serve me well. I was luckier than many here in that I'd already worked at other benches so knew what I wanted, and what I didn't want (e.g. a tool trough).

    The idea, though, that this well-considered and time-tested design will cease to be useful to woodworkers is, frankly, preposterous.
    This is my sentiment exactly. It's pretty goofy to think that the bench used by an ex-pat European (traditionally trained to boot) woodworker - who actually gets paid to produce goods for sale - would be inadequate for anyone on this forum.

    Why people have become so attached to the words of woodworking journos these days is beyond me. There are gerat writers out there indeed but not a one great enough to displace the example of a working master.

    This whole "Roubo" fad is very odd. First I'd say that our definition of Roubo is about as useful and accurate as the phrase "new and improved" and secondly the Roubo was exceedingly primitive and had many well known failings given it's materials and construction. It has miraculously blossomed into the new and improved woodworker's bench these days. Golly!

    If you feel strongly about flush front legs or certain vises I think that there is merit in discussing those topics but the freshly rebranded "Roubo" fervour is something I hope fades into the past as all trends do.

    Now if you've built one and it works for you I think that that is fantastic and I hope that you get to do a lot of work on it and that you have the opportunity to build another bench down the road that may suit your woodworking needs even better. Use/refine/redesign can be a lot of fun.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Plainfield, NJ
    Posts
    55
    I've always been intrigued over the workbench designs, especially how some people view them as altars and how others view them as what they are... a tool. Look at the simple benches at the North Bennett Street school and the work the comes off of them same as the scandinavian benches that were at RISD. I've seen Al Breed take out a cordless drill and screw a his auxillary carving bench to his workbench with drywall screws which he told me causes interesting looks from some woodworkers, and Phil Lowe has build some amazing stuff on his simple bench with just a Record vise and some handscrews.

    I have read the books by Chris Schwarz on workbenches and I compare them to being like a thesis on the subject. Being an engineer by training I was taught theory in school but once I entered the real world I found out how things were built practically. I feel there is almost a cult like feeling towards the Roubo bench which if what one wants its fine.

    Sharpening has the same kind of reverence with the Shapton stones.

    Granted as hobbyists we have time to built the altars if we like or a simple bench but I would rather be building furniture then benches.

    Just my views

    Jim

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •