LN beading tool vs Veritas beading tool

[Zach England]

I want to buy one of these and have not seen a review or even forum post that makes the case for either over the other. What say the wise neander forum?

The only thing that makes me lean towards the Veritas is the ball-type grip, which I think would make it easier to maneuver along an edge of a wide surface, which is partly how I envision myself using it.

But it appears to me that the LN has a longer offset between the fence and the cutter. I cannot find any specs to verify this.

[David Keller NC]

Zach - Give me a little while, I can measure the distance between the fence and the blade on the L-N.

[mike holden]

Zach,
These are so easy to build, why not make your own?
I would agree that buying the blades from veritas is a quick way to get several profiles to start, but you will end up shaping your own blades anyway, and the handle is just that.
Mike
Full disclosure, I own the LN and the wooden veritas, and still wind up making and using a shop-made tool. mh

[Zach England]

Zach,
These are so easy to build, why not make your own?
I would agree that buying the blades from veritas is a quick way to get several profiles to start, but you will end up shaping your own blades anyway, and the handle is just that.
Mike
Full disclosure, I own the LN and the wooden veritas, and still wind up making and using a shop-made tool. mh

Want to sell the LN? :)

I know they can be made, but that would not part me with my money as efficiently.

[David Keller NC]

Zach - The distance from the edge to the 1/4" router blade is 1-1/8" to both the straight fence and the closest part of the curved fence. For the multiple beads, the working distance to the farthest bead from the edge of the panel would be a bit further - perhaps 1-1/2".

[Derek Cohen]

A Demonstration/Mini Review of the Veritas Beader

I enjoy making beads by hand. My preference has been either to use a scratch stock or a modified Stanley #66 (longer fence and LN blades).

I have had the Veritas beader from the outset of production and have used it on a number of occasions. I made a few comments here-and-there over the past year or so, and have pieced these together into a mini demonstration-review. Note that the emphasis here is on using the tool rather than detailing its features.

The context was a panel I made for a cabinet in which the inner edge was a bead made using the LV beader ...

http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a262/Derek50/Articles/Veritas%20Skew%20Rabbet%20and%20Beader/Panel1.jpg?t=1230993269

http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a262/Derek50/Articles/Veritas%20Skew%20Rabbet%20and%20Beader/Panel2.jpg?t=1230993294

The bead was made on Jarrah which had first been grooved. Note the forward-facing fence. Since the beader is pushed, not pulled, this provides a great deal of reference in this direction, but little at the end of the run. The Veritas is a push tool, while the #66 is a pull tool.

http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a262/Derek50/Articles/Veritas%20Skew%20Rabbet%20and%20Beader/Beader1.jpg

I liked the handles, which are adjustable and reversible. The beader is comfortable to hold. The blades are easiest to install when set against the fence, and my biggest niggle was that it was not possible to fine tune the distance to the fence as the latter was fixed (unlike the #66, which slides side-to-side).

My fence, used only for a straight side, was slightly (a couple of degrees) out-of-square.

http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a262/Derek50/Spokeshaves%20and%20Drawknives/LV%20Beader/Beaderfence.jpg

It had the effect of creating a tad of tearout – just a tad …

http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a262/Derek50/Spokeshaves%20and%20Drawknives/LV%20Beader/Beaderresult2.jpg

In case you are wondering about yours being the same, I discussed this with the designer, Brian Ebbinghaus, at Lee Valley. “As designed, the fence should be able to swing above and below a perfect 90° orientation by 2° to 3°. We could have designed a connection that ensured perfect perpendicularity, but we decided against doing so as it would have added extra machining costs that we could not justify. In our testing of this design, the prototypes that lead to it and the historical models upon which we drew inspiration; we noticed that small variations in the perpendicularity of the fence had no noticeable effect upon the results. The nature of the wood grain being scraped introduced much greater variability. Also, the tools from our collection as well as hand-made scratchstocks tended to have much greater angular deviations, but shorter fences made this less noticeable.

And Brian is quite correct. In spite of the fence being off-square, the results I got were very satisfactory, very good …

http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a262/Derek50/Spokeshaves%20and%20Drawknives/LV%20Beader/Beaderresult3.jpg

A cross-section shot of the bead (taken when paring the mitre)..

http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a262/Derek50/Articles/Veritas%20Skew%20Rabbet%20and%20Beader/Framemitre1.jpg

Overall, my impression is that the Veritas Beader works rather well.

The Veritas blades are the same as the ones that come with their wooden beader, and these are smaller and thinner than the LN blades (and about the same thickness as the Stanley blades). They could be used at a pinch in the #66 (I have done so) but are not as great in that job as the #66 blades. On the other hand, the LN blades could be used in this Veritas very happily, should you want to do so. Generally I make my own blades out of 3/4" bandsaw blade.

The Veritas arris is much finer than those on the LN blades and, as a result, cuts a finer, cleaner bead line. I used both on this project, and redid the bead from the LN blade with the Veritas.

The fence on the Veritas is designed in the same style as a scratch stock. It is multi-adjustable for a straight, curved or bullnose configuration. However, it starts in line with the blade and, consequently, has limited/minimal registration when starting a cut when the fence faces forward. I would have liked a fence with rear extension for the extra registration, especially when reaching the end of a board. Having said this, I dislike the small straight fence on the #66 as well - hence this modification: http://www.inthewoodshop.com/ShopMadeTools/Improving%20the%2066%20Hand%20Beader.html.

For the record, I voted above for the #66 because, in a face off between these two beaders, the adjustable fence of the #66 just tips the balance. Either one would surfice. Still my personal favourite remains a scratch stock of the following design: http://www.inthewoodshop.com/Furnitu...atchStock.html

http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a262/Derek50/Joints/Frame%20and%20Panel/Finishedpanel.jpg

Regards from Perth

Derek

[Zach England]

Thank you, Derek. As always, very detailed and informative. It sounds like a trade-off either way. I think I'll try the LN first. I am doing some picture frames in the next couple of weeks and want something ready to go out of the box, but the case for DIY seems even stronger.

[Richard Verwoest]

Has anyone used a scratch stock across the grain? Seems to work just fine with the grain, but I have not seen, nor had success with one across the grain.

[Sean Hughto]

Sure:

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3289/2988511802_4c432d1cb4.jpg

For this top:

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3152/3061978609_a681a699fc.jpg