Jointer questions here and there, jointer questions everywhere!

[James Granger]

So the (mostly) general consensus to my previous topic/question seemed to be that a jointer would be the best tool to add to my collection. However, I have a few questions I wanted to get everyone’s opinion on:


1. It seems like everyone recommends a 8” version if I can afford it; how often do you all joint boards wider than 6”?


2. There seems to be mixed feelings on spiralhead cutters – some think them a great investment and others think them to be a waste of money. If I’m getting things correctly, the advantages are durability, cut quality, and noise level… correct?


3. It was suggested to me to think about jointer/planer combination machines. While you gain jointer capacity, you lose (some) planer capacity and infeed/outfeed table size. What’s the greater tradeoff?


4. It seems like you can reasonably manage the functions of a jointer by creating sleds for the planer and table saw to mimic the face and edge jointing capabilities of the jointer. What are everyone’s thoughts on that solution?


I appreciate everyone’s time and opinion on these items.


Thanks much!

[Russ Ambrose]

1. there are ways to mill lumber that is wider than whatever jointer you may have. for example, it is possible to face joint an 8 inch (or wider) wide board on a six inch jointer and i have done so many times. the reasons i upgraded to an 8 inch jointer are: (1) i less often have to resort to such tricks, (2) the beds of my 6 inch jointer were simply too short, and (3) my 6 inch jointer was underpowered. if my 6 inch jointer would have had a 2hp motor and 6 foot long bed, i'd probably still have it.

2. i think a spiral/helical cutterhead on a planer is more than worth the extra expense, but for how i mill rough lumber i don't think it's worth the extra expense to have that kind of cutterhead on a jointer. like most folks i suppose, i use my jointer to joint a face and then an edge after which i use the planer to get it to proper thickness. i don't see the benefit of having a spiral/helical head on a jointer because i'm almost certainly going to run both sides of the board through the planer for consistency sake if nothing else. thus, it doesn't really matter to me if the jointer's cut is less than perfect (or less than what i'd get with a spiral/helical head).

3. i considered a combo machine before upgrading my old jointer and planer, but passed because i just don't trust them. too new (at least some), too many moving parts, and i don't really know anything about them. also, the beds on them are too short for my liking. not the best reason i know, but it is what it is.

4. you can certainly go that route, but understand you are going to sacrifice time and accuracy and to some extent the ability to work with boards of certain sizes.

good luck

[Sam Murdoch]

I can't speak to questions about spiral cutters or combo machines - haven't used the former and the latter was a Hittachi from 1984. No idea what is state of the art. As for the jointing and most importantly the flattening capability of a jointer - I say that there is no better tool. Every project that involves lumber longer than 12" is well served by a bit of flattening on the jointer. (Yes, there are hand tools to do this but you aren't asking about hand planes.) I regularly glue up door panels, table tops, cabinet sides with lumber that has been all pre flattened and when I unclamp my glue up I need only smooth or sand with a good RO sander - no wide belt needed. The obvious advantage of an 8" or 12" over a 6" is that you can work with wider stock. Too often I am compelled to rip some nice 7" wide boards into narrower stock in order to insure that my glued up panel will be flat at the end. If I had a wide belt sander this wouldn't be such an issue :). But talking about jointers here. Most panels or tables or box sides require stock wider than 6" (5-7/8") whereas 8" or less is often just right for a small 2 board door panel, drawer front, or 3 or 6 board table top . It is simply very useful to flatten wider stock over needing to rip and reglue. Sadly, I could only afford the space for a 6" jointer. I make it work but it can be frustrating. I encouraged you in the last post to check out the Powermatic 54A. It is a 6" jointer with a decently long 66" bed. It uses quick change, double sided cutters which is a nice feature. Hope this helps.

Sam

[Charlie Gummer]

Hi James. I have a 6" Jet that I picked up for a good deal used. At the time I didn't have the funds for an 8" nor do I currently have a 220V circuit in my shop. I can tell you honestly that a large majority of the rough lumber I buy is wider than 6". This isn't an issue when making rails/stiles for face frames or small pieces but it really is an issue for large panel glue-ups. I really like the look of wide boards in table tops and similar panels, so much so that I've taken to flattening wider stock by hand. Ripping boards down, to fit on my jointer, is both time consuming and aesthetically a bit disappointing.

Spiral cutters also offer the ability to rotate individual cutters to get fresh edges...

[Steve Meliza]

What makes a big difference in the answers is knowing what type of work you plan to be doing, the woods you'll be using, any space or budget limitations, and if time is a priority or not.

Norm used a 6" DJ-15 for a number of years before he got an 8" DJ-20, but he also notes that he buys the flattest boards that he can so that he doesn't have to face joint. The advise I often see is to get an 8" jointer with spiral cutter head, or even 10" or 12" if you can afford it (or a combo machine), but I find it difficult to justify spending 5x of what I paid for my table saw for a jointer only to have it overwhelm a dust collector costing 10x less than it. Not to mention size and weight issues with some of those monsters. I'm pondering these same questions and haven't answered them for myself so I look forward to the discussion.

[Rod Sheridan]

I went from an 8" General Jointer and 14" planer to a 12" Hammer A3-31 combo.

Best move I ever made.

The wider jointer allows you to surface wider material, or skew the material for difficult grain.

The cartridge knives do a great job on the wood and don't require adjustment.

The planer is excellent, zero snipe, powerful 4 HP motor, and I have the digital height gauge on mine, excellent.

The combo is less expensive than comparable separates, the jointer it replaced is about $4k, the planer near $6K, and it saves space and has more jointing capacity.

They only thing I regret is not buying a Euro combo instead of the separates, could have saved a lot of money.......Rod.

[Carl Beckett]

I went from a 6" to an 8" jointer (and most recently to a 12", but too new to me to make intelligent recommendations on that..... on the other hand, 'intelligent' recommendations is a somewhat relative and subjective thing.... but that wont stop me)

There were frequently times when my stock exceeded the 6".

Significantly fewer times when it exceeded 8". In fact, for purchased lumber this 8" was sufficient.

And not that expensive - I just sold my 8", in like new condition, for $450. I dont like being flippant with other peoples budgets, but you might pay $300 for a used 6" - I think the extra cost would be worth it.

[Andrew Joiner]

I never found the need to go back to owning and maintaining a jointer.

I use planer sleds and straight line rip jigs. They work fine and they're simple and cheap.

I bought a new Powermatic 6" jointer in 1970 and used it in my cabinet shop for 3 or 4 years. I was buying S2S stock, and ran the edges thru the jointer.

Then I found out it's more cost efficient and easier to buy lumber S3S. A good blade and a decent table saw set-up beats a jointer for me, especially on long stock edges. Oh and even a cheap rip blade won't ever chip out an edge like a jointer knife can.

Recently I got a deal on some beautiful rough planks. I ran it thru a lunch box planer on a sled and straight lined the edge on the table saw with a jig.

Even if I had a source for lots of cheap rough lumber,I would still flatten it with a planer and a sled. Every time I run a piece thru I smile cause it's power feed flattening. Holding down long heavy stock to a jointer table is hard work. I mostly mill 8' or longer stock.

Sleds can be lightweight.
http://www.sawmillcreek.org/showthread.php?134633-A-Lightweight-8-Foot-Planer-Sled

You don't have to get complicated on the shims.
http://www.sawmillcreek.org/showthread.php?181141-Planer-sled-and-hot-melt-glue

[Sam Murdoch]

Andrew - that was an eyeopener for me :D. Now I know one way to solve an occasional serious deficiency in my little shop. Still, with respect - I would not trade in an 8" jointer for the sled option. The sled would augment the jointer not replace it. BUT - I don't have an 8" jointer so...:cool:

Sam

[Van Huskey]

1. It seems like everyone recommends a 8” version if I can afford it; how often do you all joint boards wider than 6”?


2. There seems to be mixed feelings on spiralhead cutters – some think them a great investment and others think them to be a waste of money. If I’m getting things correctly, the advantages are durability, cut quality, and noise level… correct?


3. It was suggested to me to think about jointer/planer combination machines. While you gain jointer capacity, you lose (some) planer capacity and infeed/outfeed table size. What’s the greater tradeoff?


4. It seems like you can reasonably manage the functions of a jointer by creating sleds for the planer and table saw to mimic the face and edge jointing capabilities of the jointer. What are everyone’s thoughts on that solution?


I appreciate everyone’s time and opinion on these items.


Thanks much!

1. I say get the largest jointer you can, period. Take a look at the thread I started on "quest machines" a large percentage of people were pining for large jointers. Usually over time people end up with the largest jointer they have room for and are willing to afford. From a cost, size and usefulness point of view I think an 8" makes the most sense for most hobbyists but even at 8" sooner or later you will probably want a bigger one!

2. I don't know about mixed feelings on spiral heads, it seems to be pretty much agreed that they are great. Now when you start talking about Euro machines and industrial old iron the cut from them can approach or exceed the quality of most spiral heads but you are in a completly different class of machine. When talking about the average Asian imported jointer other than price the helical heads are pretty much universally a positive. Durability, the ability to replace one or two cutters or rotate them if damaged, quality of cut, noise and a biggie for most people, not having to set the knives.

3. For me the J/P vs seperate J and P comes down to money and room. If you have the money and room for both get both. You do have to consider the quality of each machine. For example I would MUCH rather have a Hammer 12" jointer and planer than a Grizzly 8" jointer and 15" planer. Getting and giving capacity between the two depends on how you work. Unless you plane glue ups AND you don't find yourself skewing your boards through the planer (less of an issue if you have a spiral head) you would never need more capacity in a planer than your jointer. Quite frankly I think the best allocation of funds is to have jointer and planers match in size BUT I also beleive in having a sander that can handle ones glue ups so you never need a very wide planer.

4. I would rather edge joint on a router table than a table saw. Facing can also be done on a planer. I can also haul 4 tons of sand with my car but it is going to take a lot more work (trips) and trouble than a truck and trailer. Planer in my opinion are to be used sparingly for the unusually large board, assuming you have more planer than jointer capacity, obviously if one doesn't they would just use the jointer. Doing all your face jointing on a planer will get really old really quick. There are five machines I can't imagine working with wood and not having, the jointer is one of those five. The other big negative for sleds is having to move them and the board back for the next pass, any energy saved by not hand feeding the board is more than lost by having to move the sled and the board. Think about hauling an 8' piece of 10" wide 8/4 stock AND the sled it is on. Some people mention buying S2S or S3S lumber but I just don't see it. Lumber moves after milling and should be milled in two steps even in ones own shop starting with anything pre-milled more than straight lined lumber just doesn't make sense in MY opinion, by the time it acclimates to my shop it won't be flat anymore, so I have less material to work with.

[Todd Bin]

It's all about your budget. If you can afford it, get a 16" jointer with a spiral head and a 20" big cast iron planer with a spiral head. If your short on space then get a 16" J/P with a spiral head. If that is not in your budget get a 12" J/P with a spiral head. The next step down -- get the 12" J/P with standard knives. etc. If you are on an extreme budget then the Dewalt lunch box planer with a sled.

I own a 12" J/P with Tersa knives. It is great. I use this for almost all of my planing and the 4 kife configuartion planes even swirling grain without much tearout at all.

[glenn bradley]

1. It seems like everyone recommends a 8” version if I can afford it; how often do you all joint boards wider than 6”?

Wider than 6"? Often enough to upgrade to an 8". Wider than 8"? Hardly ever but, that's me and you're you ;-)


2. There seems to be mixed feelings on spiralhead cutters – some think them a great investment and others think them to be a waste of money. If I’m getting things correctly, the advantages are durability, cut quality, and noise level… correct?


Correct on all counts but you left off how much cheaper they are in the long run. (http://www.finewoodworking.com/ToolGuide/ToolGuidePDF.aspx?id=34431) I've had mine for a little over 2 years and at my previous knife sharpening/replacing schedule, have paid for the spiral head and then some.



3. It was suggested to me to think about jointer/planer combination machines. While you gain jointer capacity, you lose (some) planer capacity and infeed/outfeed table size. What’s the greater tradeoff?


No experience to share here.


4. It seems like you can reasonably manage the functions of a jointer by creating sleds for the planer and table saw to mimic the face and edge jointing capabilities of the jointer. What are everyone’s thoughts on that solution?

If you cannot afford at least an 8" jointer, get a better planer and make yourself a planer sled (http://www.finewoodworking.com/SkillsAndTechniques/SkillsAndTechniquesPDF.aspx?id=24118). I used one for over a year till I saved up for a larger jointer (lost money on the 6" but, that's a repeating story you will hear again and again). i still use it for the rare time I joint wider than 8".

[Andrew Joiner]

4. I would rather edge joint on a router table than a table saw. Facing can also be done on a planer. I can also haul 4 tons of sand with my car but it is going to take a lot more work (trips) and trouble than a truck and trailer. Planer in my opinion are to be used sparingly for the unusually large board, assuming you have more planer than jointer capacity, obviously if one doesn't they would just use the jointer. Doing all your face jointing on a planer will get really old really quick. There are five machines I can't imagine working with wood and not having, the jointer is one of those five. The other big negative for sleds is having to move them and the board back for the next pass, any energy saved by not hand feeding the board is more than lost by having to move the sled and the board. Think about hauling an 8' piece of 10" wide 8/4 stock AND the sled it is on. Some people mention buying S2S or S3S lumber but I just don't see it. Lumber moves after milling and should be milled in two steps even in ones own shop starting with anything pre-milled more than straight lined lumber just doesn't make sense in MY opinion, by the time it acclimates to my shop it won't be flat anymore, so I have less material to work with.

My experience has been different Van. I made lots of custom office furniture and store fixtures from lumber that was surfaced and staightlined on one edge ( S3S ) by my supplier. The architects and interior designers involved on the jobs were always happy with the quality.

My biggest sled with an 8' piece of 13" wide 8/4 stock on it is easy to handle. I have an infeed table that supports it all for setting shims. An out feed support take's the full weight as the work comes out . You don't have to carry the stock and sled around.
Unless you have a jointer with a bed longer than 8', supporting heavy 8' long stock and pushing it down to the beds is harder work than a good sled set-up.

[Don Jarvie]

The 8 inch is a good size. The 6 inch is a bit too small. I've found I could use that extra inch on more than 1 occasion. The 12 inch is great but they tend to get expensive for even the used ones.

[jonathan eagle]

I had a 6" grizzly jointer and upgraded to the 12" SCH grizzly JP. The bed length is about the same as I had before. I use it for jointing only. So I've never used it as a planer, actually.
I have a Hammer bandsaw as well. The Grizzly quality wise is every bit as good as the Hammer. I wonder if those who complain about Grizzly quality have ever used one at times! Probably not.

[Myk Rian]

I went from a Jet 6" to a Griz 8". Both long beds. The Jet impressed me with the fit and finish. You can find the Jet used for $300 or so. The 8" jointers go for $400 and up. Delta DJ-20s for up to a grand, used.
I finally sold the Griz when I restored a 1930s Wallace short bed.
I won't go back to a 6" as a lot of stock is wider than that.

[Myk Rian]

I had a 6" grizzly jointer and upgraded to the 12" SCH grizzly JP. The bed length is about the same as I had before. I use it for jointing only. So I've never used it as a planer, actually.
Use a jointer as a planer? Only a combo machine.


I wonder if those who complain about Grizzly quality have ever used one at times! Probably not.
I had both Jet and Grizzly. The Griz had a lot of sharp edges on the castings. The Jet beat it in that department.

[Van Huskey]

The Grizzly quality wise is every bit as good as the Hammer. I wonder if those who complain about Grizzly quality have ever used one at times! Probably not.

That is a bold statement and not generally backed up by those that have used both. Just an example would be the most recent review of it vs even the imported Jet where I think it was Roland Johnson who found the design of the Grizzly inferior to the Jet. Especially the most recent improved Hammer A3 is quite a ways in front of the Grizzly in design and production.

Most people that have used Euro machines or American iron feel that those that compare the quality of Grizzly favorably against them probably have not used the former. I am not saying Grizzly is unfit for the job, but most of the Euro stuff and the well maintained American iron is on a different planet when it comes to quality and precision. Then again that is just my worthless opinion but I have owned and used several iterations of each.

It is my firm belief the Hammer A3 line is significantly better than any of the J/Ps available for under $7K.

[David Kumm]

Machine quality is pretty much a function of price rather than brand. There can be some advantages depending on the currency translation from company to company but an $800 machine is generally pretty equivalent to other $800 machine. Same for $8000 machines. One might look nicer of have a feature we all like but no one here knows the quality of the cast iron used, the type of steel, the price of the bearings, or the manufacturing cost or quality of the motor. If a grizzly is as good as a Hammer it will cost about as much. If a Hammer is as good as a Felder, it will cost the same. If a Felder was as good as a Martin- oops, nothing is as good as a Martin. Markups may be somewhat different and manufacturing efficiencies somewhat different, but more often than not something less expensive is less well built. Fact of life. Dave There is a General 8" jointer for sale on www.owwm.org for $1000.

[jonathan eagle]

Machine quality is pretty much a function of price rather than brand. There can be some advantages depending on the currency translation from company to company but an $800 machine is generally pretty equivalent to other $800 machine. Same for $8000 machines. One might look nicer of have a feature we all like but no one here knows the quality of the cast iron used, the type of steel, the price of the bearings, or the manufacturing cost or quality of the motor. If a grizzly is as good as a Hammer it will cost about as much. If a Hammer is as good as a Felder, it will cost the same. If a Felder was as good as a Martin- oops, nothing is as good as a Martin. Markups may be somewhat different and manufacturing efficiencies somewhat different, but more often than not something less expensive is less well built. Fact of life. Dave There is a General 8" jointer for sale on www.owwm.org (http://www.owwm.org) for $1000.

I don't really agree with the concept of that if it costs more , it must be better. As I said I can only compare the hammer bandsaw with the grizzly JP for tool quality. I am not comparing the grizzly JP with the A3. I really wish those who have strong comparative opinions support them with facts that they have actually owned both. I can't be the only one who finds such opinions as a little weak.

[Rod Sheridan]

I don't really agree with the concept of that if it costs more , it must be better. As I said I can only compare the hammer bandsaw with the grizzly JP for tool quality. I am not comparing the grizzly JP with the A3. I really wish those who have strong comparative opinions support them with facts that they have actually owned both. I can't be the only one who finds such opinions as a little weak.

Jonathan, I'm confused by your post, have you compared the A3 with the Grixxly combination unit, or the N4400 with the Grizzly bandsaw?

You seem to indicate that you need to compare like products (which I agree with) however you then compare unlike products?

regards, Rod.

[Mark Henshaw]

As an owner of a 12" Grizzly J/P with a carbide helical cutter, I would certainly recommend it for the serious hobbyest. It replaced an 8" HSS knife jointer and a Dewalt 12" lunchbox planer. For questions in your original post,
1) I feel the carbide head is a large improvement over the HSS knives. 800 - 900 board ft of hardwood through it without a noticeable dulling of the head. Having the J/P combo allows for the head to be used for both jointing and plaining. In Dec I ran some very figured 8" - 11" curly maple boards through the jointer and planer functions with very little to no pull out.

2) You are correct that the J/P limits the length of of the jointer bed and this is indeed something to be considered before purchase. Edge jointing is never an issue but face jointing 10' and longer boards can be tiring. Thankfully the longer boards is a small part of what I work with.

3) Over the last 1 1/2 years the grizzly machine has performed well and done everything I have asked of it. Short of the beds warping or motor failure, I do know of anything that could go wrong with it that I could not fix. Before purchasing, I looked at all of the models on the market and picked the one I felt offered the most value (bang for the buck).

4) I have used the 12" jointer width more then I thought I ever would. Once you have the capability, it is hard to go back to the 8" or 6".

Just my 2 cents...

Mark

[David Kumm]

Jonathan, I agree that just because something costs more it isn't necessarily better. The variation in quality for machines though only holds true within a fairly narrow range. An $800 machine might be higher quality than someone elses $900 or $1000 machine and an $8000 machine might be better than another $8500 machine but you can't compare quality when the price gets much farther apart. Ultimately the market will crucify the companies that don't offer appropriate value. Look at the auto industry. You can compare an Audi to a BMW but not to a Chevrolet. some of the comparisons on this forum are about that far apart. The Chev might work just fine but that doesn't mean the components are of as high a quality. For a Grizzly to be built to the same standards as a Martin it would have to be priced much closer to a Martin. Lexus started out somewhat lower than Audi until the market was convinced of its quality and now it is priced higher. Dave

[Van Huskey]

I don't really agree with the concept of that if it costs more , it must be better. As I said I can only compare the hammer bandsaw with the grizzly JP for tool quality. I am not comparing the grizzly JP with the A3. I really wish those who have strong comparative opinions support them with facts that they have actually owned both. I can't be the only one who finds such opinions as a little weak.


In the general terms that Dave meant it I think it is somewhat hard to argue price doesn't follow quality. I don't think anyone would argue the Grizzly 633/634 is the quality equal of the Felder AD 531, but I also agree when talking about the Hammer A3 31 the equation gets closer. Having used but not owned either machine I can say very comfortably that IMO the Hammer has a pretty significant design advantage which carrys over into production. Again the Grizzly is fit for its intended use but the Hammer is significantly better in a number of ways but then it should be since with a helical head it is near twice the price and with straight knives it is about 1K more. The difference between the G0514 series and the Hammer N4400 is less both monetarily and quality wise, but in this case with the usually Felder haggling the price is just a few hundred dollars. In the machine world there is no free lunch, when machines are priced within 10-15% of each other there are certainly arguments to be made both ways but when the price spread begins to grow the argument is usually less about quality and more about value to the individual.

If anyone is interested in me waxing poetic about the differences between the helical head Grizzy 12" J/P and the Hammer A3-31 with a Byrd head I would be happy to.

[jonathan eagle]

Jonathan, I'm confused by your post, have you compared the A3 with the Grixxly combination unit, or the N4400 with the Grizzly bandsaw?

You seem to indicate that you need to compare like products (which I agree with) however you then compare unlike products?

regards, Rod.

Rod,
I was talking about the quality level. Love the hammer by the way. Been doing some nice resawing with it.

[Rod Sheridan]

Jonathan, thanks for the clarification.........Regards, Rod.

[Rod Sheridan]

Van, I would be interested in your comments regading the two planers, also your comments regarding the A3 with straight knives VS helical..........Regards, Rod.

[Van Huskey]

Van, I would be interested in your comments regading the two planers, also your comments regarding the A3 with straight knives VS helical..........Regards, Rod.

Rod, I am not ducking your question as I need some time for that post. I will revisit in the next day or so. If I were to do it off the cuff it might look like a Grizzly bash since it would just be bullet points with the vast majority of them pro Hammer except price. I have only any real time with the helical head on each except for one or two cuts up on a straight knife A3 up in Delaware, so I can't give much FB there but knowing you don't use exotics and don't need to change knives even as often as toothbrushes I can't imagine the cost and trouble would be worth your while to switch, though I don't think anything but curiosity was the motivation there. I would suggest anyone looking at a A3 31 or 41 go ahead and sping for the head it is only $800 for either and is installed for you.

[Russell Sansom]

I went from a dj-15 to a dj-20, higher-quality models of each. The longer bed is worth the upgrade ( actually, with watchful fishing on the local CL, I sold the DJ-15 for what I paid for the DJ-20. I also swapped in a Byrd spiral cutter head. Most of this has been said, but I'll add my 4 cents ( inflation ! ).

The force required to run a board through the spiral seems to be less.
After a few sessions replacing or shifting nicked blades I got pretty fed up. The spiral is a short flick of the wrist to fix a nick. This was significant for me. Three giant carbide blades would be expensive and a little nutty. The little carbide chickletts on the spiral head just make a lot of sense.
The spiral is a hair quieter.
After a significant amount of lumber through the head I'm still happy with the sharpness. I think this is a pretty big deal. If it were the straight cutters I would have had to blow a couple Saturday mornings for two blade swaps, not to mention the expense of new blades or the annoyance of resharpening a set.
The cut in figured wood is superior.

[Van Huskey]

I went from a dj-15 to a dj-20,


I guess it is time for a DJ-30... :D The good thing about the DJ-30 is the Byrd head for it is one of the cheap ones.

[jonathan eagle]

Van, I would be interested in your comments regading the two planers, also your comments regarding the A3 with straight knives VS helical..........Regards, Rod.

I would also like to hear this. Although that A3 was out of my price range to begin with.
There was a recent FWW article on the less expensive JPs. So they didn't have the A3.

The changeover on the grizzly was 2x as compared with the JET. I am using the JP also as a jointer and still using my lunchbox planer, but that certainly would be a drawback if one wanted to use the tool as intended.