When do you shoot endgrain?

[Kees Heiden]

The recent thread about the very nice LN shooting plane, makes me wonder. I have a shootingboard, but almost never use it. When I use it I get my Stanley #6 which works allright in this job. But I tend to think planing with the board in a vice, with a Stanley #4, working down to a knife line, works better. You can skew the plane in all directions, you use the whole width of the blade, so it doesn't dull so quickly. And I think I don't need the absolute precision a shooting board can give very often.

Mortice and tenon? Dovetails? Simple tables with exposed endgrain? No need for a shooting board in any of these. Only with miters I can understand you want such a thing, but I think a miterclamp works even better. You can again use a normal benchplane on that one.

So please shoot me, and explain where my thinking goes wrong. :p

[Stanley Covington]

Kees:

I understand your points, but if the shooting board and plane are set up properly and ready to go, they help you work quicker and with less concentration even if the project you are working on does not require the precision they provide. It seems like you are dismissing precision casually. While it is not critical for every project, it is habit that is worth developing, whether using handtools or powertools, if only to keep Murphy confused. And combining speed with precision is the mark of true craftsmanship.

I shoot nearly every board I use in making any wooden object employing precision joinery.

Stan

[Charlie Stanford]

The recent thread about the very nice LN shooting plane, makes me wonder. I have a shootingboard, but almost never use it. When I use it I get my Stanley #6 which works allright in this job. But I tend to think planing with the board in a vice, with a Stanley #4, working down to a knife line, works better. You can skew the plane in all directions, you use the whole width of the blade, so it doesn't dull so quickly. And I think I don't need the absolute precision a shooting board can give very often.

Mortice and tenon? Dovetails? Simple tables with exposed endgrain? No need for a shooting board in any of these. Only with miters I can understand you want such a thing, but I think a miterclamp works even better. You can again use a normal benchplane on that one.

So please shoot me, and explain where my thinking goes wrong. :p

I think you're fine planing to a knifed line. A shooting board is no more accurate than planing to a thinly incised line and by simply planing with a board in the vise you have other options available to you not available when shooting. You are not sacrificing accuracy. You likely may be preserving it.

Like any piece of wood, shooting boards can go out of true when the weather changes and also by wear and general shop handling if used very often. With your method, all you need is an accurate square and eyesight to see when the incised line has been hit. With a shooting board you need an extremely accurate board and a pretty darned well-machined plane to go with it.

[Ralph Boumenot]

The advantage the LN 51 gives you is that it has a skewed iron and it presents a dead nuts 90 degree to the board. You fine tune that attitude by playing with the lateral adjuster. The LN will shoot more than a #6 or #7 which is planing the end grain straight on. These planes will dull quicker and need to be sharpened more frequently, but they will do the job.
As for shooting - it's the only way to go. No noise, no worry about losing fingers, and you get it dead nuts. You can not get the same edge with a power saw that you can with a plane. You can be fussy and finesse with a plane and take sub thousands off - you can't do that with a power saw.

[Kees Heiden]

I don't think I am loosing accuracy, Stanley. On M&T joints, or dovetails, I set the shoulderline or the baseline with a square from the side. The sides are made straight, square and perpendicular first of course. I don't see how the shooting board is giving me more accuracy in this case.

And of course, everything starts with learing to saw straight to a line, so you don't need to remove so much endgrain material with a plane.

I can see how a dedicated setup like with the LN 51 is usefull in more of a production environment. Especially in a picture making shop or so.

Finally, I have nothing against anyone using shooting boards, I just kind of doubt they are as usefull as almost everyone believes they are.

[Charlie Stanford]

I don't think I am loosing accuracy, Stanley. On M&T joints, or dovetails, I set the shoulderline or the baseline with a square from the side. The sides are made straight, square and perpendicular first of course. I don't see how the shooting board is giving me more accuracy in this case.

And of course, everything starts with learing to saw straight to a line, so you don't need to remove so much endgrain material with a plane.

I can see how a dedicated setup like with the LN 51 is usefull in more of a production environment. Especially in a picture making shop or so.

Finally, I have nothing against anyone using shooting boards, I just kind of doubt they are as usefull as almost everyone believes they are.

Frame shops will be found using guillotine-style miter trimmers. It's doubtful they'd ever consider using planes on shooting boards. Not impossible, but doubtful.

[Chris Griggs]

I do what you do sometimes Kees, particularly on 8" or wider boards where shooting gets a little tougher. Actually, what makes the clamping in a vice/working to a line ever better is if you chamfer all 4 corners to the line first or make a v-notch all the way around. This makes it easier to tell when you hit the line all the way around (and,of course, the chamfer can help with spelching too).

I shoot almost everything, for me a well setup shooting board is just a lot quicker and more consistent. I made a sloped one a few months ago to help with getting more even blade wear.

Anyway, your preference is a completely valid. As far as the need to shoot (or get otherwise very square endgrain) on things like M&T and DTs and other things. I agree the need can very greatly depending on the situation. For M&Ts and DTs, the need for super accurate end grain depends on how you mark out the joinery. The way I cut these joints I really like having super accurate square ends for DTs, but for M&Ts find its less important - again it certainly depends on what edges/ends you reference when you lay out the joinery.

I just remembered a podcast that Shannon Rogers did on this a couple years ago....

Here it is http://www.renaissancewoodworker.com/squaring-end-grain/ IIRC it was a well done video.

[Stanley Covington]

I don't think I am loosing accuracy, Stanley. On M&T joints, or dovetails, I set the shoulderline or the baseline with a square from the side. The sides are made straight, square and perpendicular first of course. I don't see how the shooting board is giving me more accuracy in this case.

And of course, everything starts with learning to saw straight to a line, so you don't need to remove so much endgrain material with a plane.

Finally, I have nothing against anyone using shooting boards, I just kind of doubt they are as usefull as almost everyone believes they are.

Kees:

I have no doubt you can achieve excellent accuracy without a properly set up shooting board and plane. Rather, I was addressing your statement: "I think I don't need the absolute precision a shooting board can give very often."

But what about speed? Are you as fast planing to a knife line as you are using a properly set up shooting board/plane? For instance, if you are dimensioning a board to a precise length, the first end does not need to be scribed, just cut to length with a saw, and then trued in both directions on the shooting board without giving it a second thought. Only the final end needs to be carefully marked. This saves me a lot of time.

If you are as quick planing to a knife line freehand as you are using a shooting board, is the level of concentration required the same? If your concentration slips when planing freehand, are the consequences the same as when you use a shooting board?

Shooting boards have been around a long time. I doubt that the benefits are imagined. They aren't in my case. You might find it useful to time yourself and compare the time and effort required to achieve identical results.

[Kees Heiden]

Well, often you don't need a perfect straight end to a board. That's what I was trying to say. So it's good enough straight of the saw. That's a real timesaver, not having to plane endgrain at all.

Last week I have been working on some table legs. I cut them at an angle with a crosscut handsaw, after marking all the way around. 3 legs turned out nice, but on the fourth the saw (or me) wandered. I had to remove about 1mm on one side, tapering to nothing in the other corner. With a sharp Stanley #4 and the leg clamped in the vise it was a quick job. How would you plane an 80 degree angle on top of a 4.5 x 11 cm wallnut leg on a shooting board? BTW, nobody will ever see the top of these legs.

257110

[Sam Takeuchi]

How would you plane an 80 degree angle on top of a 4.5 x 11 cm wallnut leg on a shooting board? BTW, nobody will ever see the top of these legs.



If it's not a usual angle, you stick a piece of scrap under the workpiece, move it to or away from the shooting size to adjust angle. By the way, that's a lot of end grain planing you are doing there. Normally shooting board is used to clean up the end or make very slight trimming that can be done in a few swipes. It's a tool that simplifies the process. Toss the work piece, make few swipes and especially if you have to do more than one piece, no clamping necessary, you can do one after another, only stopping for a couple seconds to pick up the first piece, replace it with another piece without needing to mess with vise or anything else other than your left hand (or right hand).

[Kees Heiden]

Well, yes I'm sure you guys find an efficient way to use a shooting board. I'd say, it saves time not to plane the ends of boards at all. Avoid endgrain planing as much as possible. Saves on sharpening time too.

And yes I know, shooting boards are ancient. But still I wonder how much they were really used in the heighday of handtool woodworking. Back then they were really good with a saw, much better then I am.

[Gary Hodgin]

As most things in wwing, there's more than one way to do things and get good results. I have a preference for a shooting board over a vise on narrower stock and thinner stock and miters. Anything over 3/4" thick and I definitely prefer the vise. Same goes for anything wider than 5-6".

I don't really see what the knife line has to do with it. I plane to a knife line when I use a shooting board or in a vise. It's a matter of how easy it is to get to the knife line. In some cases, I prefer the shooting board while in others the vise.

[paul cottingham]

The fence on my shooting board is adjustable. I check it with a square every time before use. I trust it way more than I trust the accuracy of my sawing with my poor battered hands.

[Derek Cohen]

As most things in wwing, there's more than one way to do things and get good results. I have a preference for a shooting board over a vise on narrower stock and thinner stock and miters. Anything over 3/4" thick and I definitely prefer the vise. Same goes for anything wider than 5-6".

I don't really see what the knife line has to do with it. I plane to a knife line when I use a shooting board or in a vise. It's a matter of how easy it is to get to the knife line. In some cases, I prefer the shooting board while in others the vise.

Exactly. Well said, Gary.

Kees, what you are referring to - planing a tapered leg - is not the type of task that a shooting board is intended for.

A shooting board - at least how I use one - is for narrow pieces, under 3/4" wide. Generally around 1/2" wide, especially drawer sides which are 1/4" - 3/8" wide. These are just too narrow to comfortably balance a plane.

There are large shooting boards that are used for jointing the edges of boards. I don't have one. Probably never will. There are work-arounds for these situations, such as planing two edges at the same time, which creates a wider surface.

There are also times when planing to a line needs a little help. I do a good job most of the time getting a square edge with just my eye. Sometimes something is off - my eye, stance, I can't get the blade in the plane square ... and I pull out an edge plane, re-establish the angle, and finish the job by hand.

Many different methods. Each is suitable for some things and less for others. Just know the options and use what seems best at the time.

Regards from Perth

Derek

[Kees Heiden]

What kind of parts do you guys shoot? On which part of a furniture piece do you need such an exactly square end, that just sawing isn't good enough?

[glenn bradley]

I'm usually on the other side of this argument but, using BB ply you can knock out a board in about an hour. They don't have to be show pieces to be functional and accurate. I used UHMW for the plane to ride on but that certainly isn't required. I added a retainer strip too (again, not required) but, the basic build took very little time versus the amount of time I have saved with it.

257122 . 257123

As to "when do I use one?"; I use them when I want to sneak up on a fit. Occasionally I will have an "on the fly design alteration" and end up wanting to fit a trim or dress-up piece into an already assembled carcass for example. I cut the piece about 1/32" fat and shoot it to a perfect fit. Dressing miters is another common use for me. YMMV.

[Chris Griggs]

Usually things where I need two pieces that need to be the exact same length, as in when I hold them face to face and feel the end grain with my finger tips the end grain on both sides feel completely flush. You don't always need this level accuracy but it does stack the odds in my favor when I'm trying to end up with tight joinery and a square case.

That's just what works for me. If what your doing works for you then keep doing it. Adam Cherubini I believe advocates what your saying...that is, get good enough at sawing that at most you need to take a couple passes with a plane to clean up the end...I'm not that good a sawyer yet though. And again, for things like case sides and shelves where very accurate lengths help create a square case, I like the shooting board. Different strokes for different folks and all.

[Kees Heiden]

Hmm, I just can't think about a part that needs precise endgrain. What part of a case or a table needs to be exactly the right size, with a square end? Mostly, endgrain is hidden inside another part, or it is floating free in the air. The only parts I can think of right now are mitered mouldings.


But of course, I never mark from the end. I mark with a square from the side.

[Chris Griggs]

I'm currently working on a cabinet with shelves. The shelves are rabbeted on top and bottom to create a tongue of sorts that is set into a dado. The shoulder to shoulder distance on the shelves needs to be the same so their won't be gaps. The rabbets that create the tongue are cut with with a rabbet plane which references the end grain. This is a situation where I thought shooting to very precise length was important. Are there other ways to go about this? You can of course mark the shoulder to shoulder distance first with a square and then just make sure you plane each rabbet to the scribe line.

That's just an example of how or why I might shoot a component, even though it wasn't a requirement. No it doesn't have to look perfect and the end doesn't need to be perfectly plumb, but getting all the shelves to the same length first help me get a goo fit from shoulder to shoulder.

Its less of an issue of need and more of stacking the odds in my favor.

[Jim Koepke]

As for shooting angles, here is an experiment that was knocked out in very little time:

http://www.sawmillcreek.org/showthread.php?157217

A shooting board will make end grain square to the edge and face of a board. While making a couple of large cabinets for wife the shooting board came in handy for squaring the 18" ends that were to be dovetailed together.

A lot of times my shooting board is used to trim off a few shavings to fit. For me, it saves time over other methods. It is easy to check for square and adjust as needed.

If it takes more than an hour or two to make a shooting board, something is being over done.

jtk

[Charlie Stanford]

I'm usually on the other side of this argument but, using BB ply you can knock out a board in about an hour. They don't have to be show pieces to be functional and accurate. I used UHMW for the plane to ride on but that certainly isn't required. I added a retainer strip too (again, not required) but, the basic build took very little time versus the amount of time I have saved with it.

257122 . 257123

As to "when do I use one?"; I use them when I want to sneak up on a fit. Occasionally I will have an "on the fly design alteration" and end up wanting to fit a trim or dress-up piece into an already assembled carcass for example. I cut the piece about 1/32" fat and shoot it to a perfect fit. Dressing miters is another common use for me. YMMV.

The UHMW plastic is a good idea because it wouldn't take long to wear through plywood face veneer in a busy shop.

[Jim Neeley]

What kind of parts do you guys shoot?

I shoot nearly all of them, as a matter of habit.


On which part of a furniture piece do you need such an exactly square end, that just sawing isn't good enough?

"Need" is a relative term. I like the fit and finish of shot end grain.

Just my $0.02.. YMMV.

Jim in Alaska

[Derek Cohen]

One quick answer: Especially useful for achieving square ends when dovetailing boards together - both jigged to get the square quickly and easily, and also easier to sneak up on exactly lengths for matching opposing side, or fitting pieces within an existing cavity.

Regards from Perth

Derek

[Kees Heiden]

I can see the virtue of using a shooting board in all these cases. Not neccessary maybe, but usefull.

But I doubt if it was really used a lot in the past. Especially when you see in old furniture how the cabinetmakers weren't very concerned with total precision. I guess they would find a shootingboard time consuming.

[Stanley Covington]

But I doubt if it was really used a lot in the past. Especially when you see in old furniture how the cabinetmakers weren't very concerned with total precision. I guess they would find a shootingboard time consuming.

You have made two bold statements, Kees:

1. "But I doubt if it (the shooting board) was really used a lot in the past." It appears you base this statement on your inspection of "old furniture."
2. "I guess they would find a shootingboard time consuming."

Regarding statement 1, I too have seen rough furniture where there was little apparent concern for precision. But I have seen other "old furniture" that was masterfully made with extreme precision. Forget the stuff displayed in museums. I saw some amazing old furniture yesterday at an antique fair in Tokyo that was simple in design but dinged and dirty and damaged on the outside. Superb workmanship. I have no doubt that the craftsmen that made this furniture used shooting boards or an equivalent thereof (more than one way to shoot a board) to obtain the piston fits and tight corners, and precise joints. Sashimonoshi use them nowadays, just as their master taught them to. Or do you think they read about them in the pages of Fine Woodworking and decided the were a nifty idea to be imitated? If you are not interested in making precision furniture, you are in fine company. But you should realize that there are higher levels of skill, and mastering the the shooting board is essential for some critical aspects of such work.

Regarding your second statement, I checked Peter Follansbee's book, and he does not mention a shooting board, nor can I find any pictures of one in his shop. But there are many old texts that list the shooting board as a standard fixture in common use by cabinetmakers/furniture makers in past centuries. So while we can agree that not all craftsmen used shooting boards in the past, it also seems likely that those craftsmen that commonly used shooting boards may have been making furniture a few levels higher in quality than that shown in Mr. Follansbee's book. But to say cabinetmakers in general weren't concerned with precision enough to use a shooting plane, or found them too time consuming, is a very broad claim, especially since using a shooting plane (and sharpening the blade) takes very little time in total if one does a good job with the saw, at least in my experience. Can you support the historical accuracy of your doubts?

[Stanley Covington]

I have seen lots of wiz bang shooting boards that looked destined to self destruct over time. I applaud the ingenuity of the designs, but I have no faith in plywood or MDF. A good shooting board is stable and will last many years with little maintenance required to maintain accuracy. I have been using one small Japanese-style shooting board for nearly thirty years, and a larger shooting board dedicated to metal-bodied planes for 20+ years. It is solid wood, so it has no veneer laminations to wear through. I can't remember ever having to adjust it beyond taking a couple of quick shavings to true the runway or the fence. No magic lumber, just white oak with breadboard ends to keep it flat. I'll post pictures if you are interested.

Stan

[Charlie Stanford]

I have seen lots of wiz bang shooting boards that looked destined to self destruct over time. I applaud the ingenuity of the designs, but I have no faith in plywood or MDF. A good shooting board is stable and will last many years with little maintenance required to maintain accuracy. I have been using one small Japanese-style shooting board for nearly thirty years, and a larger shooting board dedicated to metal-bodied planes for 20+ years. It is solid wood, so it has no veneer laminations to wear through. I can't remember ever having to adjust it beyond taking a couple of quick shavings to true the runway or the fence. No magic lumber, just white oak with breadboard ends to keep it flat. I'll post pictures if you are interested.

Stan

I'm glad you mentioned truing your board for there is no way a construction of solid lumber (or even the best plywood for that matter) will stay accurate within the width of a fine, knifed line's measure of squareness throughout the seasons or throughout the life of the board. It is a metaphysical impossibility. This whole thing dovetails nicely with your other thread concerning woodworking accuracy.

This established, what exactly is your protocol for checking your board's accuracy? Do you check it often or wait for it to produce an out-of-square part and then true it up? Do you verify every part for square when it comes off the board or do you trust the board implicitly? Or, do you trust it implicitly only for a little while after each true up? Or, do you just keep checking every part when it comes off the board, all the time?

Based on your comments in the woodworking accuracy thread I assume that when you are measuring squareness, you pretty much being the man when it comes to accuracy, that YOU ARE MEASURING SQUARENESS. No wiggle room. Dead nuts square to the face and square to the edge. Given this, you may very well have the closest thing to a magic lumber shooting board that I've ever encountered.

[Charlie Stanford]

They're easy enough to make accurately on Day 1. I am still curious about your day-to-day protocol especially in light of your admonitions with regard to accuracy in the other thread. What is your disposition with respect to the board on Day 187, 295, 403, 1187...? Do you just assume it's as accurate as the day you made it?

What, exactly, do you do? 'Nothing' is a perfectly valid answer as far as I'm concerned.

[David Weaver]

measure and shim charlie. In fact, I'd rather measure and shim from day one than attempt perfection with a shooting board only to be frustrated to find that the glue has dried and the whole unit is out of square a little.

If the board moved, I'd shim it to wherever it moved. If you're fitting trim up against mitered corners or whatever, it's likely those corners will not be perfect, anyway.

I don't shoot anything bigger than about 4 inches, though.

[Derek Cohen]

The reason I have advocated and built adjustable fences on shooting boards, as well as making all add-ons (such as a donkeys ear), plus solid wood for the carcase, is that wood moves. Everything needs to be trued from time-to-time - although it is years since it was necessary (Perth is dry). Charles, for interest, my board is dead-nuts dead-on when used.

Regards from Perth

Derek

[Kees Heiden]

Of course there have been cabinetmakers making the high end stuff, using shooting boards all the time. The marquetry guys, the ebenists, the makers of federal style, the followers of Chippendale and all that. But even then, when you dig a little deeper you will find pretty rough work inside their objects. Overshooting sawlines on dovetails for example. They were concerned with style, with perfect design, and less so with perfectly square or perfectly fitted joints. When building a piece with handtools only and wanting to make some profit, you will have to speed up the work to the max. And then, for every high end craftsman there must have been hundreds making the simpler stuff for the local homes, pubs and churches. I think these guys wouldn't care so much about a shooting board, especially when you can be plenty accurate without one.

Anyway, I am certainly no expert. I just hear about people nowadays shooting everything, even rails and styles for a paneldoor. And then I look around in my shop and can't even find my shooting board anymore. So either I do something totally wrong, or a shooting board isn't the absolute neccessity it's being made in all the forums and magazines.

BTW, I mostly like the simple furniture styles, the stuff a village carpenter would have made. And I am on a handtool trip these days, so always looking for methods to increase efficienty. So far for my background in this.

And another point, I know nothing about Asian woodworking. But when I see these nice youtube vids with old Japanese craftsman making nice little cabinets, I see indeed a lot of shooting board stuff. So you are probably totally right about the japanese tradition in this respect.

[david charlesworth]

I find shooting particularly useful for thin and small work. Its not much fun trying to balance a plane on a 3/16" thick edge or end.

Small drawer sides are well suited to shooting. We want the two sides to have identical ends. A quarter of a degree off is fine as long as they are mirror images.

Small and medium picture frame type mitres work very well. Minute adjustments can be made by shimming the work off the fence with paper or card as I think David said.

Mitred boxes and linings are easily achieved on a shooting board with what I described as a "bird house" fixture on a regular shooting board. I showed most of these techniques in my third DVD. In fact I am hard pressed to imagine any another satisfactory method.

I'm sure this list is not nearly complete, shooting techniques are a great boon.

Best wishes,
David Charlesworth

[Kees Heiden]

How about a miter jack? I am indeed curious how this works in daily (weekendly) practice. At least the advantage is the possibility to skew and plane from all sides.

http://www.cornishworkshop.co.uk/wwmitrejack.html

[Jim Koepke]

I guess they would find a shootingboard time consuming.

My feeling is the shooting board is a time saver.

There are many ways to do the same thing. Find a way that works for you and use it.

It is possible for me to make a rather fine looking and square end with a chisel. My abilities at cleaning and squaring end grain with a plane and wood in a vise are not deficient. When my need is to produce many clean, squared ends in short order a shooting board can not be beat.

When just one cleanly squared end is needed, it is still faster to set a shooting board against the edge of my bench and shoot than to fiddle with the vise and chisel or block plane.

jtk

[Charlie Stanford]

The reason I have advocated and built adjustable fences on shooting boards, as well as making all add-ons (such as a donkeys ear), plus solid wood for the carcase, is that wood moves. Everything needs to be trued from time-to-time - although it is years since it was necessary (Perth is dry). Charles, for interest, my board is dead-nuts dead-on when used.

Regards from Perth

Derek

Years? Wow. Interesting.

Wear has yet to enter into the equation?

[Chris Fournier]

It can be tough at times but I find that posts responding to the OP's question are what a forum is about; using a thread as a vehicle to create a stir is selfish. I have been gulity of this myself and in retrospect I regret behaving this way.

I use a shooting board quite often, I do not obsess about it's trueness as I built it reasonably well in the first place. I simply use it, measure the result and make adjustments if required. I would not put the OP's piece in a shooting board due to it's size. I use the board for mitres for the most part. The stock is usually 3/4" or less in thickness and rarely over 4" wide. Anything larger comes off the saw or gets the vise/plane treatment if required.

[Kees Heiden]

My feeling is the shooting board is a time saver.

There are many ways to do the same thing. Find a way that works for you and use it.

It is possible for me to make a rather fine looking and square end with a chisel. My abilities at cleaning and squaring end grain with a plane and wood in a vise are not deficient. When my need is to produce many clean, squared ends in short order a shooting board can not be beat.

When just one cleanly squared end is needed, it is still faster to set a shooting board against the edge of my bench and shoot than to fiddle with the vise and chisel or block plane.

jtk

Of course, Jim, but my point is, often you don't need clean and square ends. Obvious in a panel door, the endgrain is burried inside the mortise, the styles were cut overlong and are sawed to size and planed after assembly of the door. And the endgrain of the panels is equally burried in side the grooves. Through dovetails: planing only after assembly of the drawer. Halflaps, saw the board carefully to the line, that's indeed plenty good enough in most cases. And make the baseline with a square from the sides. A dadooded bookchest: again, no endgrain visible, so no need for the shootingboard if you can saw to a line. A table with open ends: Here the boards are too big for a shootingboard anyway, so you plane the ends after the glueup of the top. Etc, etc.

Because I think the woodworkers in the handtool era were very good at sawing to a line, my guess is that they didn't use a shootingboard very often. And of course I can't prove it, other then my own work in my own shop.

[Jim Koepke]

Through dovetails: planing only after assembly of the drawer.

If the end product is to be square, it is a good idea to start with parts that are square and parallel parts trimmed to the same size.

You are free to work any way you like. As I am free to work in any way that works for me.

jtk

[Kees Heiden]

You are free to work any way you like. As I am free to work in any way that works for me.

jtk

Oh yes, for sure.

In your previous post you compared the time used to shoot on the shootingboard or to plane freehand in the vise. While my point all along this thread is to avoid planing endgrain at all (as much as possible). So that's what I wanted to explain in more detail.

[steven c newman]

Just got through cleaning up a door257278257279with WAY too much paint on it. Trying to get it to fit back in it's place. Someone had painted the door a few times, too many. Planed from the outside edges into the middle seemed to work.

[Charlie MacGregor]

While my point all along this thread is to avoid planing endgrain at all (as much as possible). So that's what I wanted to explain in more detail.

I was wondering what your point was. You obviously didn't want an answer to the question you originally posted. :confused:

[Kees Heiden]

Yes, it was pretty obviously ment to be retorical question. To start a discussion.

When reading back it doesn't look like I convinced a lot of people. :D

[Charlie MacGregor]

May not have convinced but I doubt anyone came away without thinking about it.

[Gary Hodgin]

I have a miter jack and used it last night. The down side to the miter jack is that its easy to slice part of the jack away if you fully support the back side of the piece. It does allow skewing the plane though. A big disadvantage is that it's much more difficult to construct than a shooting board. I got mine off ebay at a reasonable price.

[Kees Heiden]

Yes, making the mitre jack looks like quite a project! Sometimes one can find the german ones from Ulmia in my country. Not always cheap though.

[Gary Hodgin]

I'm not sure who made mine but, other than a few chips here and there, it's a great looking piece with the big blocks and a big wooden screw. I haven't used it in a long time. For some reason (probably related to reading this thread) I decided to play around with 45 degree miters last night. Ended up putting another minor nick in the jack. Red oak probably wasn't the best wood to play around with and I should have made a better saw cut before using the jack. Had to remove quite a bit.

I use shooting boards based on D. Charlesworth's plans on LN's website. I have the 90 degree version and had a 45 degree version until it was accidentally destroyed (left in rain) a couple of weeks ago. I was cleaning out my garage shop and had my shooting board on the tailgate of my truck and forgot about it when it started raining. Mdf doesn't hold up to rain very well.

[Jim Koepke]

While my point all along this thread is to avoid planing endgrain at all (as much as possible). So that's what I wanted to explain in more detail.

Fooled me...

Even when my sawing is at the top of its game, the sawn piece comes with a ring around the end grain from my knifed line and a bit of fuzzy left by the saw. A swipe on the shooting board cleans it right up.

Some of us do let our end grain show in polite company.

jtk

[Kees Heiden]

On halflaps I certainly see your point, and shooting it is probably a good idea if the parts aren't too big.
Last time I made dovetailed drawers I cut them on the tablesaw :eek:. I made sure the fuzz was on the inside and didn't see any reason for shooting. Another possibility is to cut the sockets not to the full depth and plane the sides of the drawer after assembly. You will probably have to plane the sides anyway.

Just giving other ideas to avoid planing endgrain...

[Stanley Covington]

I'm sure this list is not nearly complete, shooting techniques are a great boon.

Best wishes,
David Charlesworth

David:

During your career as a woodworker and teacher of woodworking you have seen many methods of work, constructed many types of furniture, and helped many people learn to enjoy woodworking. Please share your opinion regarding a few points.

When trimming/truing the ends of thicker boards, 3/4" thick or thicker for instance, where balancing a plane on the end of the board is practicable, and assuming the board is not too wide for shooting, do you believe a shooting board saves significant time in production work, or can you trim to a layout line as quickly freehand?

Do you feel that shooting helps or hinders your ability to build furniture in the rudimentary "country" style where precise angles, flawless joinery, and perfect finishes are not required?

Do you find a shooting board to be a crutch in any way?

How often are you forced to true your shooting board?

Thank you for sharing.

Stan

[David Weaver]

Small and medium picture frame type mitres work very well. Minute adjustments can be made by shimming the work off the fence with paper or card as I think David said.


Yep, that's exactly what I meant. I learned basic woodworking from a purely power tool woodworker, or 99% of the way there.

He didn't use a shooting board, but instead he uses a multirouter and when something isn't perfect, he will shim pieces and trim their ends on a multi router until he's able to fit things. This multirouter routine is incredible punishment for refusing to learn to use hand tools. It is accurate, but it takes forever, is loud and leaves you covered in dust.

I've only made two shoot boards so far, neither was perfect, and the end product of shimming has never left me wanting a perfect board.

I was glad to see your shoot board video then and find I wasn't the only person who thought shimming was more practical, convenient, and in the case where you have to match up to something on a piece that's already not perfectly straight and square because of a mistake, you've got to do it anyway.

[Charlie Stanford]

Yep, that's exactly what I meant. I learned basic woodworking from a purely power tool woodworker, or 99% of the way there.

He didn't use a shooting board, but instead he uses a multirouter and when something isn't perfect, he will shim pieces and trim their ends on a multi router until he's able to fit things. This multirouter routine is incredible punishment for refusing to learn to use hand tools. It is accurate, but it takes forever, is loud and leaves you covered in dust.

I've only made two shoot boards so far, neither was perfect, and the end product of shimming has never left me wanting a perfect board.

I was glad to see your shoot board video then and find I wasn't the only person who thought shimming was more practical, convenient, and in the case where you have to match up to something on a piece that's already not perfectly straight and square because of a mistake, you've got to do it anyway.

How do you determine when/if shimming is necessary or whether to adjust the shims from the last outing with the board? Do you run a test piece every time or just go for it?

[Sean Hughto]

I may be wrong, Charles, as I'm only a spectator here, but I think they are talking about perfecting 45 degree mitres. Presumably you have had the experience of needing to tweak the last corner of a frame to perfect the joint? It's easy to figure out which way to shim so as to modify the angle by seeing wich part of the meet is long and whish is short.

[David Weaver]

How do you determine when/if shimming is necessary or whether to adjust the shims from the last outing with the board? Do you run a test piece every time or just go for it?

For straight 90 degree ends (which is something you only have to do on small pieces or narrow pieces), I know about how much out of square my shoot board is. If the piece is only an inch and a half wide, it's not out of square enough to even bother. If it's thin and longer, then I pretty much use the same shim every time.

For miters, I have a cup of various thickness bits (credit cards, various scraps of paper, and card stock) sitting on a rack a few feet from my bench.

I just finished everything other than the T&G back bookcase on that bookcase I pictured on WC a few weeks ago (all of the endgrain is safely covered....yessssssssssss!). I shot exactly two pieces on it - the front vertical trim to fit. Someone who builds lots of small boxes that they want absolutely perfect, or really high dollar goods, maybe they would do much more precise work. I enjoy furniture building only so far as it is mixed in with making tools, that's life as a piker.

So I'm not coming at this from a direction that it's something I'd do a lot and you have to have some perfect long laundry list of tricks measured to micrometer levels. Anyhing big enough, I'd much rather strike a line and work to it with a bench plane.

[Jessica Pierce-LaRose]

On halflaps I certainly see your point, and shooting it is probably a good idea if the parts aren't too big.
Last time I made dovetailed drawers I cut them on the tablesaw :eek:. I made sure the fuzz was on the inside and didn't see any reason for shooting. Another possibility is to cut the sockets not to the full depth and plane the sides of the drawer after assembly. You will probably have to plane the sides anyway.

Just giving other ideas to avoid planing endgrain...

Planing the sides always made more sense to me - if I'm marking the depth of my sockets with a wheel gauge, I set the mating piece on the bench, and put a small shim (usually I grab a thick playing card) under the head of the wheel gauge so the setting is a bit less than the thickness of the piece I'm setting of from. When my pieces are put together, I'm cleaning the long grain, not the end grain.

The big reason I do this is because I've already used the shooting board to size the drawer front for whatever I thought was a perfect fit in the pocket and sized the drawer around that. So I probably already planed that end grain - (at least in the front) I don't need to do it again. The drawer front is probably on the tight side if the whole drawer was this width - after I plane the sides flush, take some heavy-ish strokes to taper the drawer slightly so the back isn't quite as wide and it slides in and out easier.

The other big advantage of this is that if you need clamps to put the drawer together, you don't need to jig around with weird cut clamping blocks to apply pressure on the tails - since they're just a little proud, a flat clamping block always works fine.

On through tails, I've tried marking with a square from the side rather than a wheel gauge from the ends to avoid having to trim the end grain. Same method I would do on a tenoned piece (where I lay the two mating flat edges against each other and use a chisel or knife to tick my shoulder-to-shoulder distance, the only distance that really matters) and it hasn't really sped things up. My sawing is usually pretty good on drawer-sized pieces; so as Jim says, I'm usually only making a swipe or two to clean up the piece. The nice part about planing the end grain is that it often makes lines to marking out joinery much easier to see.

For larger dovetails, I clean up the end grain mostly because it gives a better guiding surface for the fence so I can take a few swipes with my filletster plane - that little rabbet really helps with aligning larger pieces for transfering the marks.

[Charlie Stanford]

For straight 90 degree ends (which is something you only have to do on small pieces or narrow pieces), I know about how much out of square my shoot board is. If the piece is only an inch and a half wide, it's not out of square enough to even bother. If it's thin and longer, then I pretty much use the same shim every time.

For miters, I have a cup of various thickness bits (credit cards, various scraps of paper, and card stock) sitting on a rack a few feet from my bench.

I just finished everything other than the T&G back bookcase on that bookcase I pictured on WC a few weeks ago (all of the endgrain is safely covered....yessssssssssss!). I shot exactly two pieces on it - the front vertical trim to fit. Someone who builds lots of small boxes that they want absolutely perfect, or really high dollar goods, maybe they would do much more precise work. I enjoy furniture building only so far as it is mixed in with making tools, that's life as a piker.

So I'm not coming at this from a direction that it's something I'd do a lot and you have to have some perfect long laundry list of tricks measured to micrometer levels. Anyhing big enough, I'd much rather strike a line and work to it with a bench plane.

Stock under 3" wide and 3/4" thick or less really doesn't put a lot of pressure on the board to be super-accurate. You could saw stock like that effectively dead square in shop-made miter block. A Nobex Champion, for $130 or so, would easily put a square end on stock like that. And if the endgrain doesn't show then the surface left from the saw doesn't matter, right?

[David Weaver]

I don't know about the nobex, if I lived anywhere that a vintage miter box was available (for much less), I'd go that route.

A power miter saw would be fine, too. If your mark leaves things a hair too long, though, then neither is a great choice for trimming, especially not the manual miter box.

[Charlie Stanford]

I don't know about the nobex, if I lived anywhere that a vintage miter box was available (for much less), I'd go that route.

A power miter saw would be fine, too. If your mark leaves things a hair too long, though, then neither is a great choice for trimming, especially not the manual miter box.

Nobex are fine. A little tinny, but they work fine.

[Charlie Stanford]

I may be wrong, Charles, as I'm only a spectator here, but I think they are talking about perfecting 45 degree mitres. Presumably you have had the experience of needing to tweak the last corner of a frame to perfect the joint? It's easy to figure out which way to shim so as to modify the angle by seeing wich part of the meet is long and whish is short.

I have indeed but I just offer the parts, note where the joint is being held off, and either plane or chisel the offending area. If I ran a frame shop I'd own a miter trimmer. Otherwise my approach seems more direct, to me at least, and more consistent with one-off builds.

If I'm wrapping a case piece with trim it's hand fit anyway, no way a case is ever perfect enough not to need a tweak to the mitered trim. At least not any of the ones I have ever made. But I don't live in a world, like some apparently do, where an eight foot tall four foot wide hand made carcase goes together dead nuts square with perfectly flat components and therefore the trim can be shot dead square or mitered dead on the number and fit perfectly. All it takes is a little wave in a carcase side to throw off a miter at a front corner. Maybe a face frame didn't go down perfectly at a corner. Good Gosh, there are tons of reasons why a case could be out of square with respect to the moulding/trim that is to be applied to it. If all a craftsman knows how to do is shoot for square and shoot miters on a number then he's left holding his you-know-what in his hand wondering what in the world to do next.

I don't like to shim trim -it's harder to fit a shim than it is to tweak the miter directly. I make the miter fit the piece. Forcing perfect on-the-number miters on a slightly out of square or out of flat piece is going to leave a gap somewhere. So, I just start the process with sawn miters out of my Nobex and tweak from there. Sometimes, it just makes sense to set the Nobex off of a bevel gauge. Maybe these guys figure out they have 91* at one corner and something else on the adjacent and then shim their boards accordingly for each end of a mating miter. I suspect I'd be three corners down the road by the time they finished one corner. Sometimes, there might be another piece of thinner, flexible molding available in the design to hide the gap, but not always.

Any of this sound familiar or am I just a total hack?

Lousy two cents.

[Jim Koepke]

How do you determine when/if shimming is necessary…

It is called experience.


whether to adjust the shims from the last outing with the board?

See above answer.


Do you run a test piece every time or just go for it?

Every piece made in my shop is, in essence, a "test piece." Every piece tests every tool used to produce it.

jtk

[david charlesworth]

Apologies for the delay.
Stan

1. I would almost never think of shooting 3/4" or over. I used a 5 1/2, the L-N 51 will definitely handle thicker.

2. I'm not a builder of country style furniture. But surely square is preferable to crooked?

3. I think more of an invaluable jig or fixture.

4. Usually when students have been tipping planes and damaging fence! A quick pass through circular saw easily fixes this.

5 Agreeing with David again.

best wishes
David Charlesworth

[Kees Heiden]

2. I'm not a builder of country style furniture. But surely square is preferable to crooked?


best wishes
David Charlesworth

Once again, this is not about square versus crooked. Or precise versus sloppy. This is about avoiding end grain planing when it is not really neccessary, and thus saving an extra operation and a lot of sharpening time.

And btw, when you enjoy using a shootingboard, then by all means continue to do so. I'm just pointing out another way of working nice and square.

[Charlie Stanford]

It is called experience.



See above answer.



Every piece made in my shop is, in essence, a "test piece." Every piece tests every tool used to produce it.

jtk

Hip wader alert.

[Zach Dillinger]

I shoot endgrain when it threatens to harm my project by being less than square. Take that, end grain, BLAM!

But seriously, I try to make all my crosscuts dead square and straight but I'm not a machine. I often have sawing error that needs to be corrected. And I always shoot the ends of drawer pieces or anything that will be dovetailed together. I certainly don't need the stock introducing errors. I can make a gappy joint all on my own, thank you very much.

[Kees Heiden]

I'm giving up. Nobody wants to see you can make perfectly square dovetail joints without using a shooting board, or even while not crosscutting terribly straight either. On halflaps I can see how a shooting board is helpfull, but even then, when you saw reasonably straight, the joint can be made nice and square. On M&T a shooting board doesn't bring anything, and even in shelfs in dado's you can go without the shootingboard when you accept a little bit of play somewhere deep inside the joint.

[Chris Griggs]

I'm giving up. Nobody wants to see you can make perfectly square dovetail joints without using a shooting board, or even while not crosscutting terribly straight either. On halflaps I can see how a shooting board is helpfull, but even then, when you saw reasonably straight, the joint can be made nice and square. On M&T a shooting board doesn't bring anything, and even in shelfs in dado's you can go without the shootingboard when you accept a little bit of play somewhere deep inside the joint.

Kees.

Nobody has said that it can't be done, or that your methods are wrong, I/we have only stated preferences and reasons for why and when we choose to use a shooting board. I can and have cut perfectly good dovetails without shooting the endgrain, but I still rather would.

This thread started out with you saying what your preferences were and asking what others thought. The majority of the responses including my own were. "yes, your method works, I get what you're doing, but I like shoot in this situation or that situation for x,y,z reasons".

So then it turned into you trying to convince people why they should work the same way you do. Its okay for us to have different methods of work. I'll be the first to admit that I shoot things probably way more often than I need too, but I'd rather error on the side of being too anal about exactly square and exactly the same length, than error on the side of not enough. I introduce plenty of error on my own, and I'm not woodworking on the clock to pay the bills so I'm happy to expend a tiny a bit of extra time and effort to ensure an end result I am happy with. I don't even bother to bring my pieces to even thickness, but having things square and having corresponding pieces the same lengths makes things easier for me and stacks the odds in my favor even if it not a "need".

This is just my preference. I'm not going to completely change the way I work just because you have a different preference. You're points are all well taken and fully understood. I "get" what you are doing in your layout to not need clean square end grain, and its gotten me thinking about when and where I can maybe save a little time on my projects. However, only time and experience will decide my ultimate work methods.

This is a good thread you started with good points, but, unless perhaps I am misinterpreting your writing (easy to do), you seem needlessly frustrated by the fact that everyone didn't immediately agree with you. No need for that. Like I said, I think we all get what you're driving at, and you make good points, but again, most of us have reasons that we work the way we do and one persons different work methods aren't going to change that.

[Gary Hodgin]

I'm glad I have a shooting board to deal with situations where my sawing isn't as good as it needs to be and when I just want to dress up saw marks. Nevertheless, my life as a ww'er would be just about as satisfying without one. I'm sure much of the world's great furniture was made without a shooting board. But, I like mine and intend to continue using it regardless whether it's politically correct or not.:)

[Kees Heiden]

Don't worry I am not frustrated. Enjoying the discussion in fact.

in the heat of the debate it is often difficult to choose the right words and stay calm and remote. I got mildly upset when some people suggested you can't make square dovetailed joints without a shooting board. Of course the squareness of the joints comes from the baseline not from the ends.

[Chris Griggs]

Don't worry I am not frustrated. Enjoying the discussion in fact.

in the heat of the debate it is often difficult to choose the right words and stay calm and remote. I got mildly upset when some people suggested you can't make square dovetailed joints without a shooting board. Of course the squareness of the joints comes from the baseline not from the ends.

Glad your enjoying the conversation. Its easy to read to much emotion in the written word. I've enjoyed the discussion as well. Good stuff.

[Stanley Covington]

Apologies for the delay.
Stan

1. I would almost never think of shooting 3/4" or over. I used a 5 1/2, the L-N 51 will definitely handle thicker.

2. I'm not a builder of country style furniture. But surely square is preferable to crooked?

3. I think more of an invaluable jig or fixture.

4. Usually when students have been tipping planes and damaging fence! A quick pass through circular saw easily fixes this.

5 Agreeing with David again.

best wishes
David Charlesworth

David

Admirably said. Thank you for sharing your insight.

Stan

[Stanley Covington]

I'm giving up. Nobody wants to see you can make perfectly square dovetail joints without using a shooting board, or even while not crosscutting terribly straight either. On halflaps I can see how a shooting board is helpfull, but even then, when you saw reasonably straight, the joint can be made nice and square. On M&T a shooting board doesn't bring anything, and even in shelfs in dado's you can go without the shootingboard when you accept a little bit of play somewhere deep inside the joint.

Kees

I understand your point exactly and have argued a similar viewpoint for cutting tenon cheeks against strong opposition from some. Where a saw alone will do an accurate job, and the endgrain is not visible, shooting adds little to the process. I agree that shooting the ends of tenons is pointless. But I and others have disagreed with you about shooting the ends of boards in many cases. We find, based on real experience, that shooting improves the end product and reduces time expenditure. You have a different opinion based on your experience. Perhaps in time you will come to agree with us that find shooting valuable. Perhaps some that read this thread will be convinced to toss their shooting boards in the rubbish pile. Nah, that won't happen.:D

But it has been fun trying to convince you even though you started this thread with the intention of convincing others to your viewpoint.

Cheers!

Stan

[Zach Dillinger]

I'm giving up. Nobody wants to see you can make perfectly square dovetail joints without using a shooting board, or even while not crosscutting terribly straight either. On halflaps I can see how a shooting board is helpfull, but even then, when you saw reasonably straight, the joint can be made nice and square. On M&T a shooting board doesn't bring anything, and even in shelfs in dado's you can go without the shootingboard when you accept a little bit of play somewhere deep inside the joint.

Kees, I'm well aware of the fact that you can make dovetails square without shooting with your layout method. It's nothing I haven't tried before... I just prefer to shoot mine. Your way isn't right for me; my way isn't right for you. I prefer to shoot them, you don't. End of story. But I do appreciate the differing viewpoints in this thread.

Now that we've got that out of the way, let's see some pictures of your work! That's what I'm interested in :)

[Charlie Stanford]

Apologies for the delay.
Stan

1. I would almost never think of shooting 3/4" or over. I used a 5 1/2, the L-N 51 will definitely handle thicker.

2. I'm not a builder of country style furniture. But surely square is preferable to crooked?

3. I think more of an invaluable jig or fixture.

4. Usually when students have been tipping planes and damaging fence! A quick pass through circular saw easily fixes this.

5 Agreeing with David again.

best wishes
David Charlesworth

I wonder if I'm the only person who finds it mildly amusing and somewhat ironic that you restore accuracy to a shooting board using a tablesaw.

[Tony Zaffuto]

A most interesting thread!

I use a shooting board for anything I'm dovetailing. I check the pieces for square moreso than I do the shooting board and true with a large shoulder plane. My shooting is limited to around 3/4" thick (maybe a bit thicker and lots of times, thinner) and up to 5" or 6" wide and only for square. But, I'm a ham-fisted amateur and my method may not be the correct method!

I also have a Lion miter trimmer that I'll use, when needed, for anything else. It does a nice job, again, but with size limitations smaller than my shooting board and the blades have to be absolutely razor sharp.

Being a hobbyist, and having engaged in woodworking for nearly 4 decades, with the last decade or so with predominantly handtools, and without what could be called proper, formal instruction, I've had to figure out what works for me. Some things I've done so often that for me to change to what may be the right way would be anathema! But what I've found through the years, is the methods I've zoned in on, are very similar to methds of work put forth by guys like Robert Wearing (everytime I think I've come up with a workholding device that I think is unique, all I do is look in Wearing's book and see it has always existed). I also bought all the books by our own David Charlesworth more than a few years ago and find David's methods top notch. But back to Charlie's question about shooting board & movement, mine moves, but all it takes every so often, is a swipe or two with my shoulder plane (plus one pass with my #9 or whatever plane I'm shooting with) and I'm back in business. I've done this so often, that it's a natural sequence and I have to think about it to actually remember all steps!

[Chris Griggs]

Another point about adjusting the shooting board for error.

I find that even if I have recently trued the fence and even if I have a well jointed edge on the board I'm shooting I can make very very slight adjustments to the angle I am shooting just by adjusting where I put my hand pressure. Focusing the pressure against the fence on the piece being shot near the "ramp" bias thing very very slightly one way, focusing it on area opposite the ramp tweeks it the other way. Typically I just put my hand pressure in the center and my board is dialed in well enough that I get the square end I want, but its not uncommon things to be ever so slightly off in one way or the other and adjusting my pressure gets dials things in just right. This of course is less likely to be needed if I have just trued the board and have just jointed the work piece, but all to often thats not the case.

[Kees Heiden]

You can see some things I make on my blog. http://seekelot.blogspot.nl/
I am pretty new to this whole woodworking thing, started when we moved to our new house 6 years ago. Despite having a simple tablesaw and a planer/jointer combi machine, I like using handtools most. Most of what I make is somewhat contemporary design. And I am awfully slow! With a familly, a fulltime job and other hobbies, the amount of shoptime is limited. So that is why I am probably all the time looking for more efficient ways of handtool wood working.

[Chris Griggs]

You can see some things I make on my blog. http://seekelot.blogspot.nl/


257609

Cool sash/tenon saw! Did you make that?

[Zach Dillinger]

Kees, we all struggle with other commitments. I applaud you for trying to find the best way to complete your chosen work and for sharing how you do things. It's amazing how much everyone can learn when everyone shares a little while keeping an open mind. I've tried lots of different ways to accomplish most woodworking tasks and I've hit on the ways that work for me. I'm always willing to try something new when people share something I haven't tried before (which does happen quite often). That's why I keep coming back and reading the forums. Admittedly, I try to stay true to established period practice, but there is so much that remains to be filled in.

Re: efficiency. I sell my work and therefore work to be as quick as possible. So I appreciate that goal as well.

[Kees Heiden]

Yes I made that saw a few years ago. Here's the blog entry, text in Dutch, but I have a translate button at the top of the page.
http://seekelot.blogspot.nl/2011/01/even-een-kapzaag-maken.html

And Zach, I've read you blog too and like it very much.

[Chris Griggs]

Yes I made that saw a few years ago. Here's the blog entry, text in Dutch, but I have a translate button at the top of the page.
http://seekelot.blogspot.nl/2011/01/even-een-kapzaag-maken.html

And Zach, I've read you blog too and like it very much.

It's a great looking saw. Apple sure it nice looking and the shaping is very crisp. Two thumbs up!!!

[Mark Roderick]

I use my shooting board a lot. Drawer sides and front. Squaring up jewlery boxes. Basically anytime when I need perfectly square ends to boards.

My shooting board is very simple. Laminated MDF, with a narrow strip of hardwood to eliminate wear and tear. The quarter inch or so of hardwood won't move enough to matter, and its movement is uniform, like the MDF.

My shooting board produces edges that are "perfectly" square (the quotes being that nothing is perfect), with six cleanly shaved sides time after time. I've never had to re-calibrate it. I'm sure if I were skillful enough I could produce the same result planing to a knife line, but that seems to require so much more energy and setup!

[Charlie Stanford]

I use my shooting board a lot. Drawer sides and front. Squaring up jewlery boxes. Basically anytime when I need perfectly square ends to boards.

My shooting board is very simple. Laminated MDF, with a narrow strip of hardwood to eliminate wear and tear. The quarter inch or so of hardwood won't move enough to matter, and its movement is uniform, like the MDF.

My shooting board produces edges that are "perfectly" square (the quotes being that nothing is perfect), with six cleanly shaved sides time after time. I've never had to re-calibrate it. I'm sure if I were skillful enough I could produce the same result planing to a knife line, but that seems to require so much more energy and setup!

Hi Mark. Good to see you online. I miss those old Knots days.

I was curious about your method of marking the workpiece to finished length (assuming you are shooting the second end to length). Are you working to a pencil line, or usually shooting to fit an opening. Spelching ever a problem without knifed lines?

Cheers,

CS

[Mark Roderick]

And hello to you! Good to see you.

I try to use measurements as little as possible. So I'm generally ensuring that the two sides of a drawer are of equal length, for example. Or that the drawer front fits within the opening. And of course that the edges are square.

[Charlie Stanford]

And hello to you! Good to see you.

I try to use measurements as little as possible. So I'm generally ensuring that the two sides of a drawer are of equal length, for example. Or that the drawer front fits within the opening. And of course that the edges are square.

Hi, when you get one drawer side shot to length you don't use it in some manner to mark the other drawer side to assure they are the same length and therefore the drawer square? TIA

[John Lanciani]

Hi, when you get one drawer side shot to length you don't use it in some manner to mark the other drawer side to assure they are the same length and therefore the drawer square? TIA

Shoot them both at the same time, kills two birds with one stone. Way faster than knifing all those lines that you enjoy talking so much about.

[Charlie Stanford]

Really? I'd love see video of that! Got any?

[Pat Barry]

I for one would really love to see these videos so I can learn how to do this.

[Sean Hughto]

You want to learn ho to make a drawer, Pat? I'm sure videos exist. If not, the next time I make one, I'll break out my Flip.

[Chris Fournier]

Awesome. More time spent discussing shooting video than woodworking. And when woodworking is discussed people are shooting drawer components to length. The future of our craft looks sketchy or ridiculous.

[John Lanciani]

5/8" x 9" x 20" poplar, pretty standard for dresser drawers. For the purpose of this exercise the boards were cut with a power miter saw but that really makes no difference.

#1 - Boards clamped together (no tacks or tape, Charlie) ready for shooting
#2 - First end shot, 7 passes with the plane only because the sharpie bled into the grain
#3 - Second end shot, 10 - 12 passes to get the lengths exact
#4 - Results, boards are square and of equal length.


258042258043258044258041

Comments?

How about some pics of your way, Charlie?

[Jessica Pierce-LaRose]

I was a bit confused about how you did what you said you did, John. The spring clamps were the missing bit of the equation for me - had you mentioned that earlier, I certainly would have been less confused. Seems like a method that only works with certain combinations of workpiece-length and shooting-board size, but seems like an interesting approach.

I usually use scribed lines, and simply use my shooting board as an aid to sneak up on them.

[Sean Hughto]

If you use a power mitre saw, why not just gang cut them on the saw and be done with it?

[John Lanciani]

If you use a power mitre saw, why not just gang cut them on the saw and be done with it?

Because the point of the exercise was only to demonstrate shooting two boards at the same time since someone said it was all but impossible to do. Normally I'd just use the slider on my T.S. if I had a bunch to do since it is by far the fastest way for me to produce multiples. It's nice to have more than one way to do something, and for me woodworking is as much about the journey as it is the destination.

[Chris Fournier]

If you use a power mitre saw, why not just gang cut them on the saw and be done with it?

Say that makes sense; quick, efficient and good enough for the task at hand!
Perhaps I'll start a thread on using stops on saws! Video to follow.

[Sean Hughto]

My experience has been that once I find a preferred method of doing some task in the shop - whether for efficiency, result, or enjoyment - theoretical alternative means to the same end fall away or stay theoretical.

[Chris Fournier]

So, are we now to see a video of Charlie eating a hat?

The whole hat and a real hat?

And those of us who do not have a table saw, chop saw or other tailed companions of the high speed world will just have to muddle through or muscle through with our old fashioned silent helpers like shooting boards.

jtk

Is your shop truly sans tails Jim? When I spent a truly self-indulgent day in the shop, which is rare, the tailed equipment usually stands quietly while I use handtools. These days are too rare for my liking.

[Jim Koepke]

Is your shop truly sans tails Jim? When I spent a truly self-indulgent day in the shop, which is rare, the tailed equipment usually stands quietly while I use handtools. These days are too rare for my liking.

My tailed tools that actually get used are a band saw, lathe and drill press.

There are a few others, but they do not get used very often, router, circular saw, jig saw, hand drill, belt and orbital sander.

Of all of them, the bandsaw tends to get the most use.

jtk

[Sean Hughto]

John, is this shooting stacked boards something that is really part of your drawer making process, or are you just trying to establish that such a thing would be possible? And, more to the point, what is the advantage of this procedure over the myriad other possible ways to accomplish this basic task of making two boards square and the same length?

[Joe Leigh]

John, is this shooting stacked boards something that is really part of your drawer making process, or are you just trying to establish that such a thing would be possible? And, more to the point, what is the advantage of this procedure over the myriad other possible ways to accomplish this basic task of making two boards square and the same length?

I think this is precisely what Charlie is alluding to.

And Charlie I have to say, normally I look forward to your posts. I enjoy your writing style and it's obvious that you have a wealth of woodworking knowledge. However, your recent posts have had a definite combative and belligerent tone. Seems as though you are more interested in belittling others than you are in sharing or educating. Not cool.

[Mark Dorman]

In case everybody forgot what started this.

"The recent thread about the very nice LN shooting plane, makes me wonder. I have a shootingboard, but almost never use it. When I use it I get my Stanley #6 which works allright in this job. But I tend to think planing with the board in a vice, with a Stanley #4, working down to a knife line, works better. You can skew the plane in all directions, you use the whole width of the blade, so it doesn't dull so quickly. And I think I don't need the absolute precision a shooting board can give very often.


Mortice and tenon? Dovetails? Simple tables with exposed endgrain? No need for a shooting board in any of these. Only with miters I can understand you want such a thing, but I think a miterclamp works even better. You can again use a normal benchplane on that one."

i appreciate Kees starting the thread. A few years ago when I started hand tool only my layout and sawing ability where poor. In an effort to increase quality I soon built a shooting board to compensate for lack of proficientcy; as my layout and sawing ability improve I use the shooting board less. What I realize though on my current project is I use it more than I need and have begun to use the shoulder vice and planing to a line more. Then along comes this thread and makes me think; I appreciate that. Now I'm really looking at where it's needed and that helps me grow as a woodworker. Economy of movment is a good thing in my book.

P.S. I don't feed trolls.

[Pat Barry]

John, thanks for posting the pictures of your shooting board method. I am working on duplicating it (of course it will be for a right hander and will have to make do with a 'rust recovery' plane.) I don't have anything large that's got a low angle however. Do you clamp the boards to the fence when you shoot? Or is that just done by holding the board down? Thanks again.

[Ken Fitzgerald]

Folks,

I will remind everyone to read the Terms Of Service and request you pay particular attention to the portion where it indicates civil friendly attitudes will prevail. Personal attacks are not allowed at SMC and people who continue with such actions often lose their ability to post here.

For the record, if any member wishes to report a post, click on the little triangle in the lower left corner of the offending post. This will send emails to the appropriate Moderators and open a thread in the Moderator's Forum. If for some reason the appropriate Moderators aren't available, then other Moderators will see the thread and handle the situation.

Now to determine whether I want to edit out the childish behavior so readily prevalent in this thread and reopen it or just let the thread go into the archive closed or move it out of public view to the Moderator's Forum.

[Ken Fitzgerald]

Personal attacks and insults are not permitted at SMC and when you counterattack someone, you have violated the TOSs just as much as the person who initiated the behavior.

Please folks.....keep it civil...keep it friendly........ I just wasted nearly an hour of my woodworking time to cleanup posts that were childish in nature. You can disagree with someone without intentionally insulting someone. Again...continued behavior could result in people losing their posting ability at SMC.

Please!

[Mark Roderick]

No, to my mind the marking process would introduce an unnecessary possibility for error. I would stand the two ends next to each other, or butt them both against a flat surface, and feel with my fingertips whether they are the same length. If not, I would take a shaving or two from one of them and check again.

[Jim Koepke]

"The recent thread about the very nice LN shooting plane, makes me wonder. I have a shootingboard, but almost never use it. When I use it I get my Stanley #6 which works allright in this job.

If my shoulder wasn't messed up in a cycling accident a #6 would likely be my most used plane on the shooting board.

As with many tools, a shooting board is a specialized piece of equipment. Even though my shooting board is used a lot there isn't a need for the #51/52 set up in my shop. If someone was doing a lot of molding work or making picture frames the cost benefit might make sense.

For making square stock with little thought or effort for me a shooting board makes it quick work. The end of a piece can have the saw marks removed or put in square quicker than the time it takes to knife a line around a piece.


Do you clamp the boards to the fence when you shoot? Or is that just done by holding the board down?

Part of the use of a shooting board involves being able to move the work piece toward the plane. So the work is pressed against the fence and then when the plane is pulled completely back it is held in place while the work is registered against the plane's toe. Then another forward stroke of the plane is made. This is repeated until a shaving is taken of the full end grain or if a line is involved it is met.

jtk