Talk me out of building an eight foot bench please.

[Mike Mason]

"The finest craftsmen back then didn't fully comprehend wood movement"

I have a hard time believing that.

Then why did they use cross grain construction that ultimately failed? That seems pretty basic. I think we know a lot more about wood technology than they did 250 years ago.

[Mike Mason]

You don't know? I should say! You picked the wrong tree to suggest that the wood is different.

Beech is a climax species in the forest. It grows in mature forests because it can endure under a shady canopy with competition. Fast growth in a managed forest? You are thinking of some other tree.

I wasn't specifically talking about Beech, I was merely making the comment that not everything said or done 250 years ago is valid today - the materials can be quite different, for one example.

[Mike Mason]

Even farmers of the day took into account wood species for different parts of a piece; season, and even phase of the moon for harvesting wood, seasoning, and other factors that we climate-controlled box-dwellers sniff at.

I agree, they knew about different woods having different hardness and ease of working, that ring-porous wood like oak splits readily but interlocked grain wood such as elm doesn't, that the sap runs in the spring, etc. I still wonder why the most talented cabinetmakers and furniture makers used cross-grain construction at times, even after seeing early on that it failed.

[Prashun Patel]

My bench is only 5 feet and I've planed plenty of boards longer than that. My legs are slightly angled like a saw horse, which I attribute to it's stability.

While you have the space, the only reason you appear to want an 8 foot bench is to get to your mass requirements. You appear to prefer a slightly smaller bench for workflow reasons - very valid.

I think you can get to your stability requirements a different way: consider making a slightly thicker top, thicker legs, bolting the legs to the floor, bolting a cleat to the floor against which 2 of the legs can brace, slanting the leg vise side legs 5-10 degrees, or incorporating a lower shelf and weighing that down.

[Cameron Wood]

Then why did they use cross grain construction that ultimately failed? That seems pretty basic. I think we know a lot more about wood technology than they did 250 years ago.

In the future it may be questioned whether we knew much about wood technology based on buildings that rot in ten years (attached housing, stucco, poor quality wood and wood products), and throw-away IKEA type furniture which will not last long enough to be antique.

[Jim Koepke]

I agree, they knew about different woods having different hardness and ease of working, that ring-porous wood like oak splits readily but interlocked grain wood such as elm doesn't, that the sap runs in the spring, etc. I still wonder why the most talented cabinetmakers and furniture makers used cross-grain construction at times, even after seeing early on that it failed.

It might have been a simple as the resistance by the best woodworkers to share "trade secrets" with their competition.

There is also some of the abuse items received from the owners who may not have known not to push a fully loaded highboy across the floor instead of moving it on a dolly or at least something under it on which it could be slid.

I've seen items with one side facing a sunny window, having failed due to the constant heating and cooling cycles.

jtk

[James Pallas]

Remember when everyone wanted a pool table in the basement. Many of them had you making masse shots on one side and one end. Don’t get yourself in that spot. I say 4’ minimum all around if you want to enjoy woodworking.
Jim

[Scott Winners]

Remember when everyone wanted a pool table in the basement. Many of them had you making masse shots on one side and one end. Don’t get yourself in that spot. I say 4’ minimum all around if you want to enjoy woodworking.
Jim

Fair point.

[Scott Winners]

My bench is only 5 feet and I've planed plenty of boards longer than that. My legs are slightly angled like a saw horse, which I attribute to it's stability.

While you have the space, the only reason you appear to want an 8 foot bench is to get to your mass requirements. You appear to prefer a slightly smaller bench for workflow reasons - very valid.

I think you can get to your stability requirements a different way: consider making a slightly thicker top, thicker legs, bolting the legs to the floor, bolting a cleat to the floor against which 2 of the legs can brace, slanting the leg vise side legs 5-10 degrees, or incorporating a lower shelf and weighing that down.

There is good stuff in here.

One not previously explicated in thread, the wife and I are intentionally downsizing into a rental so we can get out, let the trades in to the big old house and sell the big old house on the way to building our forever home. So lag bolts in the floor are valid ideas for homeowners, we are currently renting and cannot do those things in this space.

I am confident I mentioned earlier in this thread I like to hook the toe of my workboot under the front stretcher when planing long boards. I want the top surface at a comfortable working height, and I like being able to comfortably fit both the ball of my foot and the knee of the same leg between the top of the front stretcher and the underside of the bench slab so I can clamp 'myself' to the bench while still having both hands free.

I am 5' 10" tall, about 178 cm tall, around 190# or 86 kilos, I can pretty much buy clothes that fit off the rack. I did grow up on a farm. It is my experience with my first bench that the bench and the work piece clamped to it need to be up around 300# total for me to work hard, fast, effective, and precise with both hands.

We are not in the GWPT subsection here. I am not talking about a tracksaw with an integrated router table. I am talking about a mortise chisel and a mallet. I am talking about sawing and chopping a couple dozen dovetails in 30 minutes. I can do dovetails on my lightweight existing bench, but my effort, my output, is limited by the stability of the workpiece, which is limited by the relatively low mass of my current bench and my darn bifocals. I did order new glasses today with a current Rx; but cutting dovetails in bifocals is also a pain in the neck just like using a lightweight bench.

As far as workflow, I am moving into 12x24 single car garage with my joinery tools and my homeowner tools, in my late 50s. It is tight. Giving up on the idea of a separate assembly table and trying to shoehorn in one larger bench to be both the joinery bench and the assembly table I have picked up some floor space. I did re-arrange the paper cutouts on my scale model today and feel pretty OK about my possible workflow options.

We'll see how it goes, I do appreciate your insightful comments.

[Tom Trees]

How many of those are actually playa's?
I used to have a little one the size of a book when I were a kid, should be still around at me folks somewhere, by that logic...

[Mike Mason]

It might have been a simple as the resistance by the best woodworkers to share "trade secrets" with their competition.

There is also some of the abuse items received from the owners who may not have known not to push a fully loaded highboy across the floor instead of moving it on a dolly or at least something under it on which it could be slid.

I've seen items with one side facing a sunny window, having failed due to the constant heating and cooling cycles.

jtk

Knowing not to use cross-grain construction isn't a trade secret, and it was the best woodworkers who did it. In a six-board chest, the wrought nails give enough that the cross-grain construction isn't a problem. In the drawbored mortise & tenon joints using cross-grain construction as I described above (i.e., the lowboy portion of a highboy dresser), the sides invariably crack.

What I described isn't caused by someone dragging a piece across the floor.

[Mike Mason]

In the future it may be questioned whether we knew much about wood technology based on buildings that rot in ten years (attached housing, stucco, poor quality wood and wood products), and throw-away IKEA type furniture which will not last long enough to be antique.

What you describe are poor economic decisions made by producers and consumers; let's not confuse that with the science of wood technology.

[Richard Coers]

Out of 42 comments, did anyone talk you out of it?

[Cameron Wood]

What you describe are poor economic decisions made by producers and consumers; let's not confuse that with the science of wood technology.

The makers and purchasers (or employers of the makers) of the highboys were also making economic decisions. They did what they did but that doesn't mean that they did not understand wood movement.

I recall looking at some Maloof pieces in a gallery, and they had glue drips on the underside, but he undoubtedly understood glue drips.

[steven c newman]

They were too busy arguing about what wood was used....