Scaled down Roubo bench

[Graham Wilson]

Just wondering if anyone has scaled down the length of an 84" Roubo bench and is happy with the result? I ought to have confined spaces training to be working in my shop and I'm wondering if I should modify the leg dimensions/spacing if I'm restricted to a 24" width but only a 50-60" length.

[David Gendron]

I don't see any problems, mine is 60" x 24", I have a leg vise on the front left leg. the over hang is 12" on each ends and 26" inbetween the legs(5" legs). My next bench will be over 8' for sure!!

[Andrew Homan]

Just wondering if anyone has scaled down the length of an 84" Roubo bench and is happy with the result? I ought to have confined spaces training to be working in my shop and I'm wondering if I should modify the leg dimensions/spacing if I'm restricted to a 24" width but only a 50-60" length.

Mine is 6' long and I'm happy with it; Roy Underhill's modified Roubo bench is 5' long --- there is a video of him making it in a past season of his show (on the PBS website) and there is also a description of the joinery in his latest book.
If you are building a short Roubo I would really encourage you to build the top with the wide, thick pieces rather than laminating multiple 2" boards (as I and others have done) -- it's at the top of my list of things I will do differently the next time I build a workbench.

[Graham Wilson]

If you are building a short Roubo I would really encourage you to build the top with the wide, thick pieces rather than laminating multiple 2" boards (as I and others have done) -- it's at the top of my list of things I will do differently the next time I build a workbench.

Many thanks for the link and the advice. Why do you recommend using a thick, wide piece instead of laminating?

[harry strasil]

Its a lot less work.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v81/irnsrgn/nu%20bench/coatedbench050809.jpg

[Andrew Homan]

Many thanks for the link and the advice. Why do you recommend using a thick, wide piece instead of laminating?

Besides the amount of work, as Harry indicated!, by using massive timbers for the top, you can actually build a bench without already having a bench to work on -- and you can use handtools instead of machinery. The idea of using 10-12 laminated boards for a Roubo benchtop was propagated by some plans and instructions for building a Roubo using machinery. At the time when I built mine, I asked: how would I do this if I had no access to machinery, and didn't already have a bench to work on?

Here is how you can build a Roubo without already having a bench:
-- select 2 or 3 boards (at the most, 4) for the top (OR one huge board if you can find one). 2 boards that are 3"+ thick and 10-12 inches wide should do the trick.
-- build 2 stout sawhorses out of 2x4s. With the massive boards on the sawhorses, you should be able to work them down with handplanes. Work on a face, then an edge, and then do the same with the second board. Join the two massive boards with a glued edge joint. Depending on how many boards you need for your top, you will be making 1 to 3 edge joints. This is a lot less than 10-12, and the massive boards should be rigid enough to work on them when they are resting on the sawhorses, whereas thin (2") boards would have needed to be trued on an already existing bench (or machinery).
-- At this point, the glued up massive boards resting on the sawhorses should already be looking more like a workbench, right? Now drill some holes in it for holdfasts and a benchdog. (You could also install a larger planing stop at this time, if you wish.) You could actually do a lot of woodworking with just this setup! However, at this point, focus on the legs and the stretchers, and build the base of your future workbench. You can also use massive boards to build up the legs and stretchers, rather than laminating (machined) boards as described in the plans.
-- Install the top on the frame, then put the sawhorses to work elsewhere in your shop. Now you can true up the top of the bench and build your vise.
Cheers,
Andy

[Sandy Stanford]

Just wondering if anyone has scaled down the length of an 84" Roubo bench and is happy with the result? I ought to have confined spaces training to be working in my shop and I'm wondering if I should modify the leg dimensions/spacing if I'm restricted to a 24" width but only a 50-60" length.

The Roubo is a design optimized for large workpieces processed in a millwork shop. Scaling it down doesn't make it a cabinetmakers bench in the sense that a Klausz or Frid style bench is - optimized for parts that go into Western furniture and cabinet projects.

I'd say scaling it down would make it no longer the best bench for any kind of woodworking. It doesn't have the workpiece holding capability of a European bench and would no longer have the massiveness needed for the workpieces on larger jobs.

If you build furniture, you're building the wrong bench IMO.

[David Gendron]

I'm sorry Sandy, but I think you are totaly wrong by your assomption of the smaler Roubo not being a good bench for wood working. it got mor holding power than any european bench ( other than Roubo, who was european), simply by having, the legs flush with the top, I can, on my 5' bench hold pieces that are as long as my shop!!
the Roubo, by having no apron, unlike a Nicholsen style bench, can use clamps runing under the bench top to hold stuff. I can also remove my leg vise to be abble to work edges of realy big panels, doors...And at around 300lbs it is massive anought!
Is there a perfect bench?

[Sandy Stanford]

I'm sorry Sandy, but I think you are totaly wrong by your assomption of the smaler Roubo not being a good bench for wood working. it got mor holding power than any european bench ( other than Roubo, who was european), simply by having, the legs flush with the top, I can, on my 5' bench hold pieces that are as long as my shop!!
the Roubo, by having no apron, unlike a Nicholsen style bench, can use clamps runing under the bench top to hold stuff. I can also remove my leg vise to be abble to work edges of realy big panels, doors...And at around 300lbs it is massive anought!
Is there a perfect bench?

Still don't think anything beats a traditional European bench (Klausz) for holding all sorts of parts for a serious furniture making project. The vises on a European bench are too versatile; Roubo just doesn't match up. I've never really understood what all the buzz and smitten-ness was with the Roubo but it seems to come from one particular place or two. A plus is that it's a style that lends itself to being built out of construction lumber and there aren't a significant number of parts that require extremely close tolerances like a Klausz bench does. It's an upgrade from a hollow core door on 2x4 legs, but if the OP has the skills he ought to look past it for the compromise it really is. If he's building doors, mantles, architraves, pilasters for gilded age homes, huge windows, renovations for the Palace at Versailles, etc. then more power to him - build one in full bloom. It's a great bench for that kind of woodworking.

[Brian Kincaid]

... but only a 50-60" length.

For a general use workbench I wouldn't go less than 50". My first bench ended up at about 40" due to the lumber I had on-hand. I'm constantly having to work around it. Seems that I work on a lot of 48" boards even when my projects are small. Using dog holes and vices is frustrating if the bench is under-sized. Probably 50" is too small for 48" boards.

-Brian

[harry strasil]

I think most are missing the OP's reason for scaling down because of his restricted small work space. That is why I scaled down to a 60 by27 bench from a 96 by 48 bench, I had no room to work in my shop because of the massive bench top. Why try to talk the OPer into a massive bench he doesn't have room for. That is not what he asked for. FWIW

[Sandy Stanford]

I think most are missing the OP's reason for scaling down because of his restricted small work space. That is why I scaled down to a 60 by27 bench from a 96 by 48 bench, I had no room to work in my shop because of the massive bench top. Why try to talk the OPer into a massive bench he doesn't have room for. That is not what he asked for. FWIW

He ought to consider scaling down a better design, assuming he builds furniture like most of us do. I don't think he's in the millwork business given his constraints.

[harry strasil]

Sandy, I personally don't care for the so called Roubo design, the legs just look out of proportion to the bench, I didn't follow anyones design when I built mine and I know most think I went vise crazy, but I do most everything on mine even long boards up to 8 foot and have no problem holding anything do to the versatility of the many dog holes, apron, vises and my wedge clamping system. Each to his own is my theory, what works for one will not work for others. If you are happy with your workbench, then its the perfect bench for your needs.

[Sandy Stanford]

Sandy, I personally don't care for the so called Roubo design, the legs just look out of proportion to the bench, I didn't follow anyones design when I built mine and I know most think I went vise crazy, but I do most everything on mine even long boards up to 8 foot and have no problem holding anything do to the versatility of the many dog holes, apron, vises and my wedge clamping system. Each to his own is my theory, what works for one will not work for others. If you are happy with your workbench, then its the perfect bench for your needs.

Harry, your bench looks great. Roubo is not what came to mind when I saw it.

[harry strasil]

Actually I did build a scaled down Roubo bench just so that I could say I built one. The Zippo lighter on it shows the scale.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v81/irnsrgn/nu%20bench/roubo003.jpg

[Sandy Stanford]

Super cool. That must have been fun.

[harry strasil]

Lets get back on track and try to help Graham out.
Graham just build a little model of the bench you envision and see if you like its design, its easy to modify a model if need be.

[Jim Foster]

The Roubo is a traditional European workbench! France was part of Europe last time I looked. Try and come up with something you can clamp to a Klausz type bench faster and better than a Roubo. I think a Klausz type bench excels at doing lots of dovetails, but other than that, I have a hard time understanding how a Klausz bench is more versatile or more suited to woodworking.

A leg vise and a wagon wheel vise on a Roubo do a great job of providing the capability of the two vises on a Klausz style bench.

You can also work on either the front or back of a Roubo :) Try that on a Klausz! With space at a premium, this may be a significant benefit



Still don't think anything beats a traditional European bench (Klausz) for holding all sorts of parts for a serious furniture making project. The vises on a European bench are too versatile; Roubo just doesn't match up. I've never really understood what all the buzz and smitten-ness was with the Roubo but it seems to come from one particular place or two. A plus is that it's a style that lends itself to being built out of construction lumber and there aren't a significant number of parts that require extremely close tolerances like a Klausz bench does. It's an upgrade from a hollow core door on 2x4 legs, but if the OP has the skills he ought to look past it for the compromise it really is. If he's building doors, mantles, architraves, pilasters for gilded age homes, huge windows, renovations for the Palace at Versailles, etc. then more power to him - build one in full bloom. It's a great bench for that kind of woodworking.

[Matt Radtke]

Sandy,

I think you're getting too hung up on a "True" Roubo design and its lack of vises versus modern interpretations. I'd argue that Schwarz's Roubo has a lot more in common with a Klausz bench that you're giving it credit for.

Both have dog holes and a tail vise. Klausz is a traditional one when we think of, Schwarz a wagon vise. Both do the primary job equally well, though there is a slight advantage to Klausz, as you clamp between the tail vise and apron. Wagon vise is more robust.

Both have a vise on the front, left leg. Klausz has the shoulder, Schwarz the leg. Leg vise is less in the way and you have more capacity--you're not fighting the shoulder. Shoulder vises are /the/ vise for cranking out dovetails.

After that, everything is gravy. My plan is something of a hybrid. My under-carriage looks a lot like Frank's. My top will be a laminated Roubo about 3 1/4" thick when the hand planes are done with it. It will have a wagon vise and square dog holes. Leaning towards a metal, quick release vise for the front. Pictures will be up when it's done.

Once you do something like that, what's the difference? If you find the lack of a shoulder vise is a problem, why not build a 2'x1'x38" bench with a shoulder vise? That's my plan, should I find my bench lacking. It'll be a better height for sawing, while my main bench will be for planing whatnot, roughly 34-36 inches.

[Graham Wilson]

I go back and forth between the Klausz, Roubo and Tage benches but which ever I build it will need to be built no longer than 60". That is all the space I have and it is considerably more than I had previously in my apartment using workmates and saw horses. I have a lot of maple and beech stored in the shop at the moment which is limiting my workspace. I milled most of it myself after they came down in a storm 5 years ago.

I'm not a fan of the sawdust catchers at the back of the Klausz bench but realize it could be built without one. The front vise looks useful for hand work but the 5'th leg arrangement will impact my floor space (it really is a tight shop). I figure that with the short Roubo I can skip the sliding holding board and use the opposite leg with a veritas hold down to secure longer boards. This will also give me a fair bit of useable storage space for 3-4 drawers of layout/setup tools without impacting my ability to clamp to the top. In terms of size, I'm looking at something slightly larger than the Sjoberg cabinet bench (http://www.leevalley.com/wood/page.aspx?c=2&cat=1,41637&p=51104) @ Lee Valley... but with significantly more weight.

As for projects, I live in a smaller house and build mostly smaller-scale things... cabinets, tables and I'd like to try a rocker later this year.

[Sandy Stanford]

Sandy,

I think you're getting too hung up on a "True" Roubo design and its lack of vises versus modern interpretations. I'd argue that Schwarz's Roubo has a lot more in common with a Klausz bench that you're giving it credit for.

Both have dog holes and a tail vise. Klausz is a traditional one when we think of, Schwarz a wagon vise. Both do the primary job equally well, though there is a slight advantage to Klausz, as you clamp between the tail vise and apron. Wagon vise is more robust.

Both have a vise on the front, left leg. Klausz has the shoulder, Schwarz the leg. Leg vise is less in the way and you have more capacity--you're not fighting the shoulder. Shoulder vises are /the/ vise for cranking out dovetails.

After that, everything is gravy. My plan is something of a hybrid. My under-carriage looks a lot like Frank's. My top will be a laminated Roubo about 3 1/4" thick when the hand planes are done with it. It will have a wagon vise and square dog holes. Leaning towards a metal, quick release vise for the front. Pictures will be up when it's done.

Once you do something like that, what's the difference? If you find the lack of a shoulder vise is a problem, why not build a 2'x1'x38" bench with a shoulder vise? That's my plan, should I find my bench lacking. It'll be a better height for sawing, while my main bench will be for planing whatnot, roughly 34-36 inches.

I wouldn't say 'hung up.' I suppose if you reduce one in size, add accoutrement and features not found on the original then what's left is only suggestive of a Roubo and the debate becomes more about semantics than anything else.

The European design has been pretty stable for hundreds of years I think for a reason. It's just damned hard to improve on it.

[Matt Radtke]

I wouldn't say 'hung up.' I suppose if you reduce one in size, add accoutrement and features not found on the original then what's left is only suggestive of a Roubo and the debate becomes more about semantics than anything else.


Now that's a statement I can get behind.



The European design has been pretty stable for hundreds of years I think for a reason. It's just damned hard to improve on it.


It could be argued, (pardon me while I play devils advocate. I like the general form and function of the Eastern European bench,) that the lack of change could be attributed to the strict master/apprentice system. You did what your master taught, and what his master taught, and what his master taught, etc.

[Sandy Stanford]

Now that's a statement I can get behind.



It could be argued, (pardon me while I play devils advocate. I like the general form and function of the Eastern European bench,) that the lack of change could be attributed to the strict master/apprentice system. You did what your master taught, and what his master taught, and what his master taught, etc.

I worked at what I think was an old Hoffman and Hammer (before they thinned them down) for a few years in a commercial shop. I thought it was perfect and still do. I can't imagine one single thing that I would want to change about it. It was a true joy.

[Graham Wilson]

I worked at what I think was an old Hoffman and Hammer (before they thinned them down) for a few years in a commercial shop. I thought it was perfect and still do. I can't imagine one single thing that I would want to change about it. It was a true joy.

From Highland Woodworking the Hofmann & Hammer Workbench is described as:

Measures 85" long by 25-1/2" wide, with the front edge fully 4-1/4" thick. It weighs 286 lbs, enough mass to keep it stationary through the most vigorous work. The shoulder vise is 19-3/4" wide, with a maximum opening of 9-1/4". The powerful tail vise offers 10-1/4" maximum opening, with 6-1/4" x 4-1/4" unobstructed jaw faces. Four dog holes along the vise let you control stock up to 90" long on the benchtop.

Sounds like a fine bench but it doesn't matter what style, that is still 30" longer than I have available. Perhaps one day I'll have more space but in the meantime would you shrink the top of a Roubo or shrink the Klaus/Tage/Haufmann&Hammer. Either way, it will be a compromise and shorter than ideal.

I figure a shorter bench is better than no bench at all ;)

[Sandy Stanford]

From Highland Woodworking (http://Highland Woodworking) the Hofmann & Hammer Workbench is described as:

Measures 85" long by 25-1/2" wide, with the front edge fully 4-1/4" thick. It weighs 286 lbs, enough mass to keep it stationary through the most vigorous work. The shoulder vise is 19-3/4" wide, with a maximum opening of 9-1/4". The powerful tail vise offers 10-1/4" maximum opening, with 6-1/4" x 4-1/4" unobstructed jaw faces. Four dog holes along the vise let you control stock up to 90" long on the benchtop.

Sounds like a fine bench but it doesn't matter what style, that is still 30" longer than I have available. Perhaps one day I'll have more space but in the meantime would you shrink the top of a Roubo or shrink the Klaus/Tage/Haufmann&Hammer. Either way, it will be a compromise and shorter than ideal.

I figure a shorter bench is better than no bench at all ;)

Shrink a Klausz/Frid bench but retain the vises, dogs, tool well, etc. in their exact configurations.

[David Gendron]

Tool wells are just hamsters nest!! IMO they are a waist of usable bench space or floor space and if you are resticted in space like me(12x12 shop) you need all space to be usefull, not gathering shavings over my tools!
How big is your shop Sandy? What is your bench? Do you have some pictures? I'm always interested into other people shop , to get some ideas.
Thank you.

[Matt Radtke]

Tool wells are just hamsters nest!! IMO they are a waist of usable bench space or floor space and if you are resticted in space like me(12x12 shop) you need all space to be usefull, not gathering shavings over my tools!
How big is your shop Sandy? What is your bench? Do you have some pictures? I'm always interested into other people shop , to get some ideas.


I don't see a tool well as a waste of space. If you're working on a huge piece of lumber, it should span the well. Fix the hamster next problem by making the bottom removable.

To make it more useful, my plan is to make removable bottoms and swap-in-able tool holders. Trays, holes for chisels, a sub-well, etc, whatever strikes my fancy.

[Mark Maleski]

In terms of size, I'm looking at something slightly larger than the Sjoberg cabinet bench (http://www.leevalley.com/wood/page.aspx?c=2&cat=1,41637&p=51104) @ Lee Valley... but with significantly more weight.

Graham, that's the bench I use - like you, I had been using a Workmate in a confined space, and when I found the Sjoberg for $150 at a Woodworking Show I snatched it. Maybe my experience with it can help give you some insight into what you should consider as you build your own small bench.

- It's definitely too light (but you know that). I was trying to drawknife a piece held in the vise the other day, and had to keep my foot on it to keep the whole bench from moving. But it's strong/heavy enough that I haven't had any difficulty when using hand-planes.
- It's too tall, or at least I'd like it a bit shorter for hand-planing.
- It's too short for just about anything else. I'm planning to build a platform w/ additional vise(s) for cutting joinery.
- Clamping large pieces to the front is a PITA. I would love the use of a board jack - and legs in plane with the front of the bench. Workholding in general stinks, but that's due to lousy vises which I'm sure you'll avoid.

Other than the weight, I don't think the limitations are due to the size of the thing. I choose smaller projects based on the size of the shop, which means I haven't overpowered the bench. Gramercy holdfasts work fine in the thin (1") top. I suppose one other consideration might be to have good storage underneath - I don't have room to leave my shooting board or bench hook on the benchtop while working a different operation so I keep those on the shelf below.

[Rob Fisher]

Just wondering if anyone has scaled down the length of an 84" Roubo bench and is happy with the result? I ought to have confined spaces training to be working in my shop and I'm wondering if I should modify the leg dimensions/spacing if I'm restricted to a 24" width but only a 50-60" length.

While I have not built a bench of my own, yet, I have recently read Schwartz's book and have been looking at a bunch of benches including the Roubo with the intent of building my own and I absolutely think that you could scale down the Roubo. It will require some thoughts about shortening the overhangs and how that might effect whatever vises you use and the projects you intend to build. An asymmetrical bench, with one overhang larger than the other, may be appropriate.

Hope this helps,
Rob

[Andy Pedler]

I have a question about scaling down the Roubo bench design in Schwartz's "Workbenches" book. I'm ready to start on mine but I really don't have room for a full 8 foot length. I have room for a 7 foot length, and I'm wondering the best way to scale it down.

My initial thought is to simply reduce the lengths of the stretchers by 1 foot and obviously build the top 7 feet long, but keep the same amount of left and right-hand overhang as in the 8 foot plan. Does any one see any reason to scale down the overhangs?

Thanks,

Andy - Newark, CA

[David Gendron]

Andy, I don't see any problems at all! But I'm sure that others will!