Making a table top appear thicker

[Jeff Monson]

So I've got some 3/4" wormy maple that I plan on using for the top on a coffee table project. The plan is for a floating top,
so I would like the top to appear 1 1/2" or so in thickness. Suggestions on how to achieve a good look with the 3/4" material?
My first thought is to miter the edges, but the ends would require 3 miters, not so sure that would be easy.

[Brian Tymchak]

My first thought is to miter the edges, but the ends would require 3 miters, not so sure that would be easy.

The way I learned to build up an edge profile is to build the top wider than needed, then cut the edge and fold it under, so that the 2 cut faces become a bookmatch. this guarantees consistency of grain and color.

I'm not sure how to interpret your comment about mitering edges and requiring 3 miters on the ends... you would have to miter the ends of the offcuts to fold under the edges but I don't think that is quite what you are thinking about?

[Brian Kincaid]

Add a 45deg chamfer to the top corner all the way around maybe 1/4 to 1/3 of the top thickness. It is a nice optical illusion.
-Brian

[Prashun Patel]

I agree with Brian Kinkaid; chamfer the top edge.

That being said, I am unclear about your description:

When you say 'miter the edges' did you mean edgebanding? I am unclear where the '3 miters' happens.

Also, in my experience, floating top tables are typically designed with thinner tops. To my eye, the negative space between the tops of the leg and the table top affects the perceived proportions of the legs and the top.

The irony to this situation is that I consider a floating top precisely when I think my table stock is too thin.

YMMV!

[Jeff Monson]

Yes I meant cut it oversize and "fold the edges in". Hard for me to explain I guess. For simple math, lets say I want a finished top that is 24" x 24", with a 1.5" thickness. I'd add 3" so I would have 2 x 1.5" edges to fold over. I would have to cut a 45 degree into the top and edges for a seamless look. When I get to the ends that is where it seems tricky to me, a 45 across endgrain, and 45's on each end to blend into the edges seems tough it would be an intersection of 3 45 degree cuts. I dont want a butt joint where the end and the edge meet.

Brian and Prashun, I have done a chamfer on floating tops before and I do like the look. For this top though, I want a thicker appearance. I plan on wrapping the legs around the corners of the top. So calling it a "floating top" may not be the best term for it.

[Cody Colston]

I think you had the right idea at the beginning. Cut oversize and fold the off-cuts over to maintain grain continuity. Mitering the corners of the "fold-overs" does add some difficulty but it's a good look.

[Doug Garson]

If I'm picturing what you're proposing to do correctly, the top would require all four edges to be mitred and all four of the pieces used to build up the thickness would require three mitred edges. I've done what you are proposing for some small boxes about 4" square for facial tissue. It's a challenge to get all eight edges perfect for sure. You said the wood was wormy maple, that might work in your favour as defects in the mitred edges could perhaps be disguised as more worm damage. You might want to try a smaller prototype with some cheaper wood to see if you can get the joints tight enough to carry out the allusion of one solid piece. For my boxes I made the four sides of the box and glued them up and then made the lid oversized and then test fit and trimmed until I got the fit I wanted. I made four boxes and none of them had all eight edges perfect but pretty darn close. A lot will depend on how well tuned your table saw is.

[Jeff Monson]

Yes, that is the look I'm trying to achieve. Agree 100% on tuning of my saw. Getting a 45 is one thing, but matching 3 of them I can see as a bit more of a challenge.

[Sam Murdoch]

Rather than doing a folded miter you might consider simply adding the thickness directly to the underside BUT add a very slight kerf between the pieces. That will negate the need for perfect grain match but still achieve a thicker top. The end pieces too would be cut as a strip and added under. You would only need to miter the 4 corners of the underside rips.

Otherwise- you know what you've got to do very carefully

[Doug Garson]

Rather than doing a folded miter you might consider simply adding the thickness directly to the underside BUT add a very slight kerf between the pieces. That will negate the need for perfect grain match but still achieve a thicker top. The end pieces too would be cut as a strip and added under. You would only need to miter the 4 corners of the underside rips.

Otherwise- you know what you've got to do very carefully

Maybe you could fill the kerf with a contrasting wood strip to disguise the fact that it is the joint between two pieces of wood.

[Mike Henderson]

Unless I misunderstand, doing miters for the underside pieces is not very difficult. You have to be careful and sneak up on the final fit, but it's not hard. I did a coffee table a while back where I wanted a thick presentation to the outside but didn't want to make the whole top that thick. I glued another 3/4" piece under the top, all around and used miter joints on the corners.

Here's a picture of what I did. The picture shows the top upside down.
Judy's table - leg attachment 001.jpg

The main pieces are held together with Dominoes. The "thickening" piece is just glued to the main piece. It's cut out because the leg will go there. The screws are to provide more strength for the leg attachment - not needed just for the "thickening" piece.

Here's what it looked like right side up.
Judy's table - leg attachment 014.jpg

Mike

[Oops, I think that's 5/4 stock, not 4/4.]

[Jeff Monson]

Rather than doing a folded miter you might consider simply adding the thickness directly to the underside BUT add a very slight kerf between the pieces. That will negate the need for perfect grain match but still achieve a thicker top. The end pieces too would be cut as a strip and added under. You would only need to miter the 4 corners of the underside rips.

Otherwise- you know what you've got to do very carefully

I like the idea, it surely simplifies the task. The contrasting strip would look nice also, I do plan on using walnut along with it.....so a walnut strip. You guys rock!!

[Jim Becker]

My first thought is to miter the edges, but the ends would require 3 miters, not so sure that would be easy.

Yes, mitering the ends would require some precision, but it's possible. That said, it might cause some wood movement issues with cross-grain. You'd still need to laminate at the ends of the table top to get the end-grain look and depending on the wood, it may or may not be obvious.

[Sam Murdoch]

I like the idea, it surely simplifies the task. The contrasting strip would look nice also, I do plan on using walnut along with it.....so a walnut strip. You guys rock!!

Adding the walnut is a good idea too, but to be clear, I was just suggesting that the shadow line of a small kerf could be enough.
I did that here a while back, including the end grain but as this was a fore a heavy pine hutch the kerf was more sunstantial than I was thinking for your more refined piece. Anyway, here is a look - (Crappy picture but it's all I've got. The image is zoomed in too much from the original, but you get the idea.)


Hutch-edge.jpg