Sliding Panel Saw Solution Sought

[Bill Adamsen]

I can see that being great for the kind of special project he has, but clearly would interfere with frequently "changing gears" so to speak and processing sheet goods. I like the idea of having the parallel measuring system in place with all the flip-stops "preset" for the expected widths, and the ability to flip them up to cut the high aspect job, and then flip them down "out of the way" without having to remove the jig for the next full sheet sizing. Again .. simply because that's the kind of work I'm doing.

[johnny means]

Not to hijack, but whats the benefit of mounting a J/P on the side of a saw? Seems like it just gets in the way.

[Steve Rozmiarek]

Not to hijack, but whats the benefit of mounting a J/P on the side of a saw? Seems like it just gets in the way.

It's for space savings. My machine is a full 8' plus slider, in a small two car garage. For right now at least. There is not much room for a big j/p in there unless its in the center of the room, so the combo makes sense. It makes you think a project through a little more maybe, but that has the side benefit of speeding up work flow. No complaints from me.

Bill, sounds like you have some good ideas, curious to see what you come up with.

[johnny means]

It's for space savings. My machine is a full 8' plus slider, in a small two car garage. For right now at least. There is not much room for a big j/p in there unless its in the center of the room, so the combo makes sense. It makes you think a project through a little more maybe, but that has the side benefit of speeding up work flow. No complaints from me.

Bill, sounds like you have some good ideas, curious to see what you come up with.

I fail to see the space savings. Looks like two full size machines bolted together to me. I could push my J/P against the side of my saw and have the same "space savings", but I would have the option to move my J/P out of the way when needed.

[Steve Rozmiarek]

I fail to see the space savings. Looks like two full size machines bolted together to me. I could push my J/P against the side of my saw and have the same "space savings", but I would have the option to move my J/P out of the way when needed.

They are two full size machines bolted together. But, by bolting them together, you can get rid of the right hand table, and replace that real estate with a j/p at the same height. Look at my saw, you can see the power feeder bracket behind the blade. Because they are all in one clump, I can also use my power feeder on the jointer, which is an awesome way to face joint. In that little space I have, there is no way I could have accommodated separate full size machines. In my example, I also get other little benefits, like one duct drop and one 220 power service.

With a slider, most of your work is on the sliding table, left of the blade, not to the right. I actually built my daughters a barn to play with (toy) with the j/p in planer mode for the whole project, just to see if it got in the way. Lots of ripping little stuff from big stuff in that project, and plenty of bevels and angles thrown in for fun. It didn't, because its a sliding saw, not a conventional saw. If you do need the j/p to a flat outfeed table, it takes maybe 20 seconds. The type of work you use the right table for is sheet goods construction. You are not using a j/p for that usually anyway.

I'm not trying to convert anyone, you'll know it if a full combo is right for you. If not, get separate machines. The way I work, it's right for me though.

Bill's original question is a good example of work flow staying on the slider side of the blade. (also as a nod to the original topic...)

[Kevin Jenness]

Another approach to narrow rips is to use the rip fence pulled back toward the operator clear of the blade and use pinch blocks on the sliding table to guide the workpiece against the fence. Google "Fritz and Franz" for an illustration. This keeps your hands away from the blade without adding another obstruction on the left side.

[Bill Adamsen]

Kevin:

I absolutely do use that approach to "crosscut" same size sides or top/bottoms of carcases but again the rip fence approach (on my machine) requires walking around the saw to adjust. A Tiger fence or alternative would take care of that problem I'm sure. Also, I typically run into the scenario of needing to process another sheet which requires removing the fence. I usually figure that out when I have the sheet balanced on my shoulder or the slider and have to walk around the rear extended slider to remove.

What I was trying to understand was how others were getting a parallel cut on "high aspect ratio" pieces with minimum movement from the slider's operator station. Processing "optimized" cut-lists can require a bevy of cross and rip cuts, and there are times when narrow pieces are encountered that would be optimally cut on the slider using the same "stops" used during the other sliding operation. At the "end of the day," I just wanted to see what tools and processes others were using to handle that operation. I was also looking for something that could mount on the saw/slide and yet could be "out of the way" of processing full sized sheets when not needed. The laser and flip-up stops are both worthy of further consideration. Likely the stops, since I have them, and are very comfortable with mechanical systems like this.

[Bill Adamsen]

Not to hijack, but whats the benefit of mounting a J/P on the side of a saw? Seems like it just gets in the way.

Johnny: To echo Steve's comments ... it is definitely a personal decision ... and not right for everyone. In my case it optimized the space since I really needed everything in basically the center of the room (barn), and since I work by myself, I can plan out the operations to not conflict. I rip and process very long wood strips on occasion (boatbuilding) and I can pass the wood on both saw and J/P out the door on one end and window on the other. Plus the DC drops to a single location and can move just inches (on a ball joint and gantry) to accommodate operations on saw, shaper or J/P. I could have also worked with the four different machines, but this one machine works well for my needs.

[Erik Loza]

Erik: How easily does that remove?

Two Kipp levers, slides right off.

Erik is that an LS XX positioner?

?????

I fail to see the space savings. Looks like two full size machines bolted together to me.

Johnny: To echo Steve's comments ... it is definitely a personal decision ... and not right for everyone. In my case it optimized the space since I really needed everything in basically the center of the room (barn), and since I work by myself, I can plan out the operations to not conflict. I rip and process very long wood strips on occasion (boatbuilding) and I can pass the wood on both saw and J/P out the door on one end and window on the other. Plus the DC drops to a single location and can move just inches (on a ball joint and gantry) to accommodate operations on saw, shaper or J/P. I could have also worked with the four different machines, but this one machine works well for my needs.

This ^^^^

A 4-in-1 combo will always occupy less room than two semi-combos (a saw/shaper and jointer/planer, for example). Reason being that your saw/shaper will (at least here in the US...) typically have a 50"+ rip table to the right of the blade. That automatically makes it bigger in overall footprint than an equivalent full combo machine. Personally, I like the fact that being able to put the combo right on the middle of the shop frees up tons of wall space for benches, finishing, etc. One dust drop, one power hookup, etc. There is also an economic factor involved. I'm sure it's the same for pretty much every Euro mfr. but the cost of buying two semi-combos is typically higher than buying a full combo and none of them are cheap, so that's definitely a factor. At least if my business is any indicator.



Erik Loza
Minimax USA

[marty shultz]

I made a set of the Fritz and Franz blocks that I use quite often to straight-line wood.

[Kevin Jenness]

Bill, I am used to using sliders with 50" rip fences, and just put up with the walk around the beam to adjust it for rips wider than 14" or so. Most operators I have seen use the same approach. The left side parallel gauge could be a good solution for reducing movement. We had one in my workplace for a Griggio SC 3000 but it was rarely used, probably out of habit and the fact that it was a bit of an obstruction in itself, limited to about a 32" cut, and the scale was not really precise enough to inspire confidence. It had a spring loaded popup stop that like your projected setup was effectively below the table level for straightlining sheets.

I am curious why you say you have to remove your rip fence to process a new sheet. Can you explain?

Just for comparison, I'll describe how I use a slider for cutting cabinet parts. If I am working with material that I expect to distort when busting up the sheets,like mdf, I'll make my initial rip cuts oversize, straightline each oversize piece, rip it to final width with the rip fence and set it aside. If I'm confident the material's not going to go bananas, I'll make an initial straightline cut on the sheet and cut subsequent rips to final size. Once I have the rip cuts done, I'll use the rip fence pulled back as a crosscut stop until the rips are short enough to use the crosscut fence stops. No doubt other people do it differently, and I'm eager to hear suggestions for working more efficiently.

[Bill Adamsen]

I am curious why you say you have to remove your rip fence to process a new sheet. Can you explain?

Just for comparison, I'll describe how I use a slider for cutting cabinet parts. If I am working with material that I expect to distort when busting up the sheets,like mdf, I'll make my initial rip cuts oversize, straightline each oversize piece, rip it to final width with the rip fence and set it aside. If I'm confident the material's not going to go bananas, I'll make an initial straightline cut on the sheet and cut subsequent rips to final size. Once I have the rip cuts done, I'll use the rip fence pulled back as a crosscut stop until the rips are short enough to use the crosscut fence stops. No doubt other people do it differently, and I'm eager to hear suggestions for working more efficiently.

If I have to process a sheet where a crosscut is greater than the limit of the fence (15" on one stage, 30" on the second), I would have to either move or remove the fence. The below cutsheet (for a grained sheet) illustrates numerous situations where the fence would need to be moved to the second stage if not removed entirely. From an operator's perspective it is simply more efficient to not have to walk around the machine to reset the width for a narrow piece. Specific ... let's look at sheet 1 ... first cut is a crosscut at 30-1/2 for either end. To process I would probably rip (edge), rotate, cross, cross, sizeXn, rip. With any of those initial crosses, the fence would be in the way. Yes, were the fence at 50" (and the operator remembered to slide it there) the issue would somewhat disappear.
Cutlist.jpg

[Steve Rozmiarek]

Here is a link to the Fritz und Franz jig video. It's worth watching just for the big Martin, but the jig is very good too.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DqzVglze9Nk

Before I saw the video several years ago, I did something similar using toggle clamps. It works, but theirs is better.

[Bill Adamsen]

I made a set of the Fritz and Franz blocks that I use quite often to straight-line wood.

Marty: Thanks. If you hadn't mentioned that I might not have found Steve's other thread ... should have started this thread there! Those blocks are great - just the concept of using the track for this purpose is great - but my slider (Knapp 410) is just over 8' so it doesn't solve the issue for my machine for full length cuts.