Bench height

[Sean Richards]

Have recently read a few threads on workbenches including this current one http://www.sawmillcreek.org/showthre...ench-questions. A standard reply is "X said in his book that you should use the pinky test"

So where did this "pinky test" idea come from? I have used a few different benches in various shops (over 20+ years) including one that was ~120-30 years old and I don't think I have ever seen a bench as low as what the "pinky test" would give for the average adult male. Most older benches I have seen have been around the 32" height. Did a quick review just to check my gut feeling and came up with the following points(nothing new here I know).

Scott Landis in his workbench book quotes heights for period Nicholson and Roubo benches at 32" and 31 3/4" respectively with 18th and 19th century American benches ranging from 28 to 33".
If these early benches were optimised for hand planing it was for wooden planes so the above heights are too low if you are using Bailey style planes.
There is statistical data to suggest that in general todays population (in the western world at least) is higher than that of the 18th and 19th century.

If we use the premise that 18th and 19th century wood workers worked on benches that were perfectly tuned to their stature and the nature of work carried out (this seems to be a popular idea but also slightly flawed I think), and that the heights quoted by Landis for period benches are correct then those same 18th and 19th century woodworkers would I think be a bit bemused by the idea of the "pinky test"

So enough theory and having tried it in practice - (being a pretty fit male of average height and proportions) I would hate to work (and that includes planing) on a "pinky test" bench. Personally I think the "pinky test" is at best a non-ideal way to to choose your ideal bench height and at worst a crock.

Discuss ...

[Chris Griggs]

So are saying you want something higher or lower? I think your saying the picky test puts most benches too low? What do you think a better way to determine bench height is? Just curious....

[Sean Richards]

So are saying you want something higher or lower? What do you think a better way to determine bench height is? Just curious....

I thought I was reasonably explicit in my original post but just so it is clear - for me the so-called "pinky test" will produce a bench height that is way too low. That is based on personal experience.

As for a better way to determine bench height I don't think there is a magic "rule-of-thumb" that determines an ideal bench height - if such a thing exists.

[Chris Griggs]

I thought I was reasonably explicit in my original post but just so it is clear - for me the so-called "pinky test" will produce a bench height that is way too low. That is based on personal experience.

As for a better way to determine bench height I don't think there is a magic "rule-of-thumb" that determines an ideal bench height - if such a thing exists.

Yes you were explicit, I read through it a couple times but in reading through the historical stuff guess I missed the initial point. Just read through it again you did indeed state that you had never seen a bench as low as the pinky test would put one. Thanks for reiterating nonetheless...

[Joey Chavez]

I'm looking to build a Roubo and did the pinky test and I'd be looking at 30" which seems too low and awkward. However for planing I keep reading the lower the better. I can see the benefit in that, being able to use my legs more to drive through the cut. Only way to know for sure is to stack some wood on the floor and stand on it next to my definitely too high current bench.

[Chris Vandiver]

Hey Sean,

What exactly does the "pinky test" consist of?

[David Posey]

Pinky test and historical examples are equal to each other for me. Either way I go, I end up with a 32" bench height, which has been pretty comfortable to me so far. I actuall worked for a while on a makeshift bench that was about 30, and that really wasn't too bad as far as height went. Lack of stability made it pretty miserable though. I'm 5'11" if that helps you place this height at all. I do seem to have freakishly long arms, however, and always end up buying 36/37 arm length dress shirts.

As best as I can tell, Schwarz for his part emphasizes that this is only a guideline given because people will inevitably ask "How high should I build my bench?" I don't have his workbench book, but in The Anarchist's Toolchest he spends 2.5 pages explaining other considerations before giving this guideline, not rule, with the qualifications that it's a ballpark and what worked for him. There's an implicit YMMV in there, and, as with pretty much all advice, you can take it or leave it as you will.

[Sean Richards]

Hey Sean,

What exactly does the "pinky test" consist of?

Hi Chris, I believe (and I will give myself a slap on the wrist for quoting second-hand information) that you are supposed to determine your 'ideal' bench height by measuring from the floor to the knuckle of your pinky finger - for me that gives just under 30" yet the bench height I have iterated to over quite a few years is probably 4" inches higher at least - I should actually measure it.

[Mike Holbrook]

The pinky test is suggested By Chris Schwarz, both in his workbench DVD and maybe in Hand Tool Essentials too. The tests calls for one to allow the arms to fall to the side, measuring from the floor to the joint between the hand and pinky. I believe Chris makes his suggestion based on the idea that the bench in question will be used most for planing. The idea is to be able to plane without bending the arms as much, reducing fatigue. Actually I believe the suggestion is to adjust the height to the specific type of planes one uses. I for instance made 4 wooden planes. Wooden planes are often an inch or two taller than metal planes, placing hands using those planes that much higher. If you read Derek's post, mentioned by the OP above, he actually pilled bricks beside his current 34" bench to get him to the level suggested by the pinky test. Derek seemed to find the suggested height for him of 30" more comfortable.

[Sean Richards]

Wooden planes are often an inch or two taller than metal planes, placing hands using those planes that much higher.

My toted wooden planes would be 4" or so higher

[Jim Koepke]

I am not worried as much about arm fatigue as I am lower back fatigue.

My current bench is a little tall by way of the pinky test. I also know that my lower back doesn't get as bothered by edge planing wide boards as much as it gets fatigued planing the edges of narrow boards.

This tells me that my bench should be a few inches taller.

I do not care about rules of thumb as much as using what makes my body ache less.

jtk

[Curt Putnam]

For me, a bench that feels good planing edge grain is too high for face planing a panel that is 24" wide. The converse is also true. Both heights are impossibly low for any other kind of work requiring that I actually see what I'm doing (sawing, carving, other detail work.) My experience factor is not great but my back is old and arthritic. When I can bring my (over) weight to bear, lower is good, otherwise it is bad. Lacking room for two major benches, I'm working at designing elevated solutions; i.e., Moxon, Bench-on-Bench, etc.

I think the pinky test involves averages of leg length and arm length as well as back structure. I think the empirical approach is best. The think, perhaps, that face planing a panel, with the full width of an iron (as opposed to heavily cambered) may be the worst case (requiring the lowest bench height.) Detail sawing or chiseling may be the best case (highest bench height.) Where will you spend the majority of your time and effort? Adjust from there.

[Jack Curtis]

I have a fairly low bench, and any back problems, which btw are independent of the bench, are cured by yoga, or modified yoga as in Robin McKenzie's very cheap paperback "Treat YourOwnBack" Its exercises work very well, and keep on working.

[Steve Branam]

Here's my writeup on tuning the height of my Roubo bench: http://www.closegrain.com/2011/04/roubos-slippers.html.

The biggest challenge is committing to a height when you build it!

[Jim Foster]

Who knows, maybe it was originally devised around the Golden Mean, which would put this idea on a divine level of consciousness in the old days. That being said, it works pretty well for me.