Split top bench downsides etc?

[ian maybury]

Some specific bench questions. The long planned Roubo style bench in beech is about to get started (tired of looking at the stack of timber), and I'm wondering if anybody has found that the popular split top has downsides? It'll be hefty - 4in plus thick top, with matching understructure. i.e on the heavy end of the spectrum. The thinking so far is to use a Benchcrafted style leg set up with cross rails under and blind tenons into the top, and bolt up stretchers - to enable future disassembly if needed.

The extra clamping ability and ease of handling during build and afterwards all sound like strong arguments for incorporating a split top - and it would make wood movement less of an issue too. Wary though of supporting the two half width/half weight top pieces off just cross rails between the legs - of effectively halving the mass of the top, and leaving it totally dependent on the rails for support. i.e. the solidity and ability of a bench like this to absorb impacts when chiselling and the like without bounce is the whole point in making it heavy - it'd be a pity to give that away. It may not be an issue given that even a half top wil be a very solid piece of timber - but right now a one piece top is the plan...

Another basic is adhesives. Something like Titebond 2 extend is attractive, but I'm wary about longevity. A thread a couple of years ago floated the thought that a structural adhesive like liquid polyurethane might be a better if less convenient choice, but in absence of hard data (as opposed to marketiung claims) didn't reach any firm conclusions. i.e. both seemed to work fine. Has anything popped up since to change this view?

The choice of vise has evolved, but seems to have settled on the now almost standard DIY leg vise and wagon type at the end. I've ordered a Benchcrafted criss cross for the leg vise. Are these (the criss cross) holding up well in use? Any downsides?

Thanks

[Dave Anderson NH]

Ian I highly recommend using Titebond Extend for laminating up a top. The extra open time makes life a lot easier when you are trying to spread the glue out reasonably evenly over a large amount of surface area. As far as I can see my latest bench done 5 years ago hasn't had any problems with the adhesive breaking down or losing strength. Do yourself a favor and DO NOT try to laminate the whole top at once. When I did mine I separately laminated the white ash in groups of 3 strips at a time. When all the groups of 3 were done I then laminated the 3s in pairs to make 6s. Each group of 6 was then jointed and planed and the 6s were then laminated together and so forth. It makes life a lot easier. By the way, you are going to need some extra muscle to move things around once you get 6 pieces laminated together. Another hint, build the base first so you can use it to work with the top as you are doing the laminating. Any extra time spent carefully aligning the pieces in each grouping as you laminate will pay big dividends in cutting down the amount of time you spend jointing and planning. Good luck and show us pictures as you progress.

[Chuck Nickerson]

Four years ago I built a split-top Roubo from the Benchcrafted plans. The only negative in my work is getting both top pieces level with each other after a move; it's also my assembly table. It takes an extra five minutes each time I move the bench, perhaps four times a year.

Having the split top means I can break it down by myself to take the bench to club meetings and for demos. I don't regret the decision.

[Jim Koepke]

My thought on a split top would be to have a ledge along the insides so pieces could be placed in it to bridge the top when needed/wanted.


ability of a bench like this to absorb impacts when chiselling and the like without bounce is the whole point in making it heavy - it'd be a pity to give that away.

Somewhere I learned to always chop out above the legs. My bench is too light weight to chop in the middle on some of the heavy stuff.

jtk

[Bob Lang]

My split top bench is coming up on its sixth birthday, and I haven't experienced any of the issues you're worrying about. Once you reach a certain mass the differences are minimal, probably not measurable without laboratory instruments and for me, not noticeable. I'm still happy with the decision I made as the open space makes the bench a lot more versatile. As far as the glue goes, titebond types of adhesives have been in use for about 100 years. We don't know for sure if they will last longer than that, but I don't think there will come a point in time when every PVA glue joint fails due to age.

Bob Lang

[Curt Putnam]

Ian, what follows is all IMO which means YMMV.

I'm going with a split top. I'm currently toying with the idea of making the working side 15" instead of 12". The base structure will be stronger than a true Roubo where the top is the support. As long as the transverse stretchers have at least a third sitting on top of a leg the result should be stronger than a Roubo. You will still have the tenons into the top as well as the stretchers. My top will be mixed maple - I want the front 3" to be hard maple. Tail vise(s) are not yet decided but I already have 2 7" QR units: a Wilton and a Rockler - one for each half of the top. Leg vise is Lake Erie screw with Jim Ritter's Chain Leg Vise instead of the criss-cross. Still dithering about length, I want 8' but really only have room for 6'. The only argument against a split top is the difficulty of keeping the two halves perfectly coplanar. It may be the only argument but it is mighty powerful and part of the reason that I'm thinking about a 15" front "half."

You don't have to worry about heat during glueup. If I do it in the summer even Titebond Extend will start curing before I can get it spread. I will probably go with something like Unibond 800 or Dap Weldwood to get a sufficiently long open time. Other than that Titebond !, II or III or LHG are just peachy.

[Adam Maxwell]

I'm wondering if anybody has found that the popular split top has downsides?

Can't speak to the Roubo, but I have a doubly split top on my Nicholson-ish bench, and it's been very useful; I mainly keep battens in the gaps to act as a planing stop and minimize the junk that falls through. It's only 2" thick, and bounce/solidity is a non-issue.

[ian maybury]

Thank you gentlemen. That sounds like a pretty unanimous vote for the split top and the PVA - which is nice to hear, because they bring some other benefits. That's a yes on both pending anything else coming up. The wide near half bears thinking about Curt.

One benefit of a leg vise is that it places the screw pretty low - which leaves scope for a pretty deep traverse rail/stretcher. It certainly makes sense to glue the top up in sections which can also be jointed and planed.

Bob's 21st century bench (took a look just now) with an end vise on a split top make possible sawing to the left or right of the vise - i guess that's the one that's given away in return for the planing and other capabilities of a wagon vise if that's the decision. The leg vise likewise seems to have a basic simplicity, holding ability and depth above the screw as above that's attractive, but gives away capability to a twin screw in terms of ability to carry clamping dogs in the moving jaw, sawing off the LH end, holding wide parts (a Moxon covers this), tapers etc.

I'm tight for space too. Looks like I can manage about 90in or a bit less length, but the back will be only about 7in from a wall and access to the ends is a tiny bit restricted. (about 30in to a wall one end and a bit more to a tool board the other) Additional width over the usual 24in would reduce badly needed space in the area in front. Height is an awkward choice - that most suited for planing is potentially too low for other work given my dodgy back. Thinking of making a narrow platform to move in and out from underneath as required to get the best of both worlds...

Benches generate interest like nothing else it seems - but then as a design problem there's so many angles to them. Especially the interaction between features. A case of making calls as best we can and then finding out over time how they work out… Will take some photos, but can't guarantee the schedule....

[Paul Saffold]

Ian,
I finished mine a little over 2 years ago and have no regrets with the split-top. I followed the plan you are describing - Benchcrafted style. I second Dave's advice about gluing up in stages. I used Titebond III for it's longer open time and put it on quickly with a 2" paint roller.
"Wary though of supporting the two half width/half weight top pieces off just cross rails between the legs - of effectively halving the mass of the top, and leaving it totally dependent on the rails for support." If the cross rails are flush with the top of the legs, then the top of the leg will be supporting much of the top. My legs are 5"x5". So 10" of the 24" top is on the leg. With a stout cross rail it isn't going anywhere.

[ken hatch]

Some specific bench questions. The long planned Roubo style bench in beech is about to get started (tired of looking at the stack of timber), and I'm wondering if anybody has found that the popular split top has downsides? It'll be hefty - 4in plus thick top, with matching understructure. i.e on the heavy end of the spectrum. The thinking so far is to use a Benchcrafted style leg set up with cross rails under and blind tenons into the top, and bolt up stretchers - to enable future disassembly if needed.

The extra clamping ability and ease of handling during build and afterwards all sound like strong arguments for incorporating a split top - and it would make wood movement less of an issue too. Wary though of supporting the two half width/half weight top pieces off just cross rails between the legs - of effectively halving the mass of the top, and leaving it totally dependent on the rails for support. i.e. the solidity and ability of a bench like this to absorb impacts when chiselling and the like without bounce is the whole point in making it heavy - it'd be a pity to give that away. It may not be an issue given that even a half top wil be a very solid piece of timber - but right now a one piece top is the plan...

Another basic is adhesives. Something like Titebond 2 extend is attractive, but I'm wary about longevity. A thread a couple of years ago floated the thought that a structural adhesive like liquid polyurethane might be a better if less convenient choice, but in absence of hard data (as opposed to marketiung claims) didn't reach any firm conclusions. i.e. both seemed to work fine. Has anything popped up since to change this view?

The choice of vise has evolved, but seems to have settled on the now almost standard DIY leg vise and wagon type at the end. I've ordered a Benchcrafted criss cross for the leg vise. Are these (the criss cross) holding up well in use? Any downsides?

Thanks

I've a split top, it has advantages....easier to handle during the build, gives a place to hold saws and chisels while you work. Ease of clamping, not so much, but the biggest problem and the reason my next bench will not be split is I use holdfasts and battens for most of my bench top holding and the split is often right where I need a hole for a holdfast. If you do not use holdfasts there is no real downside.

[Bob Lang]

Bob's 21st century bench (took a look just now) with an end vise on a split top make possible sawing to the left or right of the vise - i guess that's the one that's given away in return for the planing and other capabilities of a wagon vise if that's the decision.



When I designed that bench I came "this close" to putting in a wagon vise. In the end I went for the quick release because I can still capture stuff between dogs on the bench top and I have normal vise capabilities on the end. It also simplified the installation so I see it as a bonus. I use that vise a lot more than I thought I would going in.

Bob Lang

[Mike Brady]

I've found no real drawbacks with the split top. One puzzle solved was in flattening the two top sections. I now just loosen the rear section and slide it forward to meet the front one. After clamping them together, I run a 5-1/2 plane with a toothed blade over the whole thing. It is perfectly level then and has that nice grippy surface.

[ian maybury]

I hadn't thought of that angle Mike. Benches are the subject of never ending interest it seems Bob - it's always compromises. Many of us i suspect (me anyway) don't have the experience and/or consistency of the type of work we do to make a really tight choice - we end up running with something and finding ways to make it work for us.

I have a Record from the late 90s, and thought of using it too. Was put off a bit by the fact that it wasn't that well made/had it's limits in use. (e.g. it didn't like asymmetric loading) Plus there were some mutterings about regarding the possibility of droop. Likewise regarding the possibility of a twin screw on the face, although there are additional complicating factors to that too to do with layout of the bench legs. No doubt most of these issues can be headed off by choosing the right vise, and installing it properly - but my thought/hope with the leg and wagon vise and given our limited access to hardware over here (tends to be a case of ordering stuff you haven't seen before from a catalogue) was to keep it simple and reliable...

One option that's not much seen in a leg vise except in historic pictures is to extend the chop and the leg some distance above the top of the bench - it sounds like it should provide a nice solution for sawing from either side, and at a comfortable height. Seems like it could be a bit of an obstruction at times though. e.g. long pieces using the deadman or other support to the RH end as well would need to be raised quite high for planing...

ian

[Paul Saffold]

I've found no real drawbacks with the split top. One puzzle solved was in flattening the two top sections. I now just loosen the rear section and slide it forward to meet the front one. After clamping them together, I run a 5-1/2 plane with a toothed blade over the whole thing. It is perfectly level then and has that nice grippy surface.

Mike that sounded like a easy solution and I was wishing I'd thought of it a couple of months ago when I fattened it. But when I went downstairs and looked I need to slide the top 4 inches (tenons are 2 1/2" wide plus the tenons centered in the leg) but the gap is 2".

Ian, I have a Record 52 for my end vise and am happy with it. My bench is here http://www.sawmillcreek.org/showthread.php?183190-My-split-top-finished. I have added a second row of dog holes in the front section and don't have a problem with the gap interfering with clamping.
Paul

[Joe A Faulkner]

I note that there is guy named Bill Shenher who has several uTube posts on his split top build. You might want to check that out. In episode 4 he covers how he flattened his top. I considered a split top, but in the end went the single slab route. If I were to do a split top, I would integrate a board in the middle that would sit flush, but could be flipped to act as a planing stop - maybe 3/8 inch to 7/16 proud. Good luck on your build.

[Curt Putnam]

Ian - my thinking is that using a QR metal vise (Record style or equivalent) offers some advantages that a wagon vise does not. A 7" vise on a 12" section is only 5" short of coverage - a 12" chop only hangs past each edge by 2.5". Wracking can be controlled by simply adding the appropriate sized chunk of wood to the non loaded side. So you can put a dog(s) wherever you want in the chop. Tail vises don't seem to need super clamping force - they just keep stuff from wiggling around the bench. You get to clamp stuff in the vise and can do things like saw into the split where you won't hurt anything - whereas a tail vise merely clamps something ON the benchtop. A lot depends on the work you will do and your methods of work. My bench will wind up looking a lot like Paul Saffold's. If you haven't already, read Bob Lang's description of his bench. The thought processes around make clear some of the choices and tradeoffs that are involved.

If your's will be a walk around bench, you can easily set up a Moxon style twin screw on the back side (that's my plan). Chisels and saws are equally accessible from either side with a rack using up the middle - replaceable modules

[ian maybury]

The metal vise is eases installation too, plus the long jaw offer the potential for more than one dog hole location/clamping mode. Wagon versus metal vise on the end of a split top is a bit of a conundrum. Does the (reputed) excellence in use and solid build of a wagon (don't hear comment about technical downsides) warrant giving away the additional functionality (and also some potential but not necessarily significant technical downsides) that the metal vise brings?

The leg vise and deadman or other means of long work holding versus twin screw call is perhaps less clear cut, in that there's a fair amount of overlap in capability.

Perhaps the lucky bit (given the way that different workholding and other solutions seem to come in and out of widespread use as they get popularised) is that the vast majority of users seem pretty happy with what they have. Decision time.

Thanks again..

[ian maybury]

A PS in the form of another question. Sliding deadmen (? :) ) seem generally to be set up so they run on a triangular bottom rail - with the upper end running in a groove in the bench top. The latter is often deep enough to make it possible to lift the deadman off the bottom rail, and to remove it.

Guess I'm wondering if leaving the deadman free to lift (it could be set up otherwise) has ever caused difficulty for anybody, and if so how? e.g. might it tend to lift if work is clamped to it for planing under the horizontal force? I'm thinking not if the leg or whatever vise holds it firmly, but that the deadman is probably not much use in isolation because it's so free to move. Perhaps this requirement doesn't arise in practice?

Against that lateral/sideways stability must surely become an issue if a deadman is made too narrow?

Bob L's high level stretcher with dog holes (and the types with a deep front apron) are perhaps in some respects less flexible solutions, but they have the advantage of being rock solid stable...

[Brian Holcombe]

My bench is rather large and a solid top. If I were to make any changes to it, it would have been a split top and slightly narrower.

The top on mine is 1-3/4" with a 4" thick skirt on one side. This design required a spline and battens to remain stable and flat through seasonal changes. A 3-4" thick split top likely would not require battening.

[ian maybury]

Additional stability (re wood movement) sounds like it should be another definite benefit of a split top Brian. Thanks for that...

[Thomas love]

Flattening should be no different than non split top , I use a number 8 .

[ken hatch]

Flattening should be no different than non split top , I use a number 8 .

Same here.

I was wondering if I had missed the memo, happens often these days ;-).

[Malcolm Schweizer]

Four years ago I built a split-top Roubo from the Benchcrafted plans. The only negative in my work is getting both top pieces level with each other after a move; it's also my assembly table. It takes an extra five minutes each time I move the bench, perhaps four times a year.

Having the split top means I can break it down by myself to take the bench to club meetings and for demos. I don't regret the decision.


I never thought of the issue with getting both tops level. I plan to build one and use the center board that flips to become a planing stop.

[Bob Lang]

I think flattening both is a non-issue. When I made mine, both pieces went through the planer consecutively so they were flat and the same thickness. If power weren't available I would have clamped them both together. For all the ink that's spilled (and pixels wasted) on flattening tops on a regular basis, it's not something that comes up very often. I've done mine a couple of times in the last six years, but mostly for cosmetic reasons. There is a space of 7+ inches between my tops and a #5 or larger plane bridges the gap so it isn't any different that planing a wide board with a hollow down the center. Worst-case scenario would be to take out the bolts that hold down one side and shove it over to butt the other half. I haven't seen the need for that, but I'm just lazy and have better things to do.

Bob Lang

[Prashun Patel]

I cannot argue with the theory that both split and non-split should flatten equivalently.
I offer this though:

I have two benches: one split, and one not split. My solid ash top is flat. My split maple top has crowned. I can only theorize that two halves are able to move independently, whereas the solid halves keep each other more honest.

I used to like my split top for it's clamping ability. But if you're a handplaner, even if your top stays flater than mine, you're going to HATE all those shavings that fall through the slot; I'd rather have a row of dog holes and some holdfasts. I'm working up the energy to join the two halves into a sold top.

[Curt Putnam]

I'd rather have a row of dog holes and some holdfasts.

Why do you see a split top as being inimical to dog holes and holdfasts? Or did I misunderstand what you said?

[ken hatch]

I cannot argue with the theory that both split and non-split should flatten equivalently.
I offer this though:

I have two benches: one split, and one not split. My solid ash top is flat. My split maple top has crowned. I can only theorize that two halves are able to move independently, whereas the solid halves keep each other more honest.

I used to like my split top for it's clamping ability. But if you're a handplaner, even if your top stays flater than mine, you're going to HATE all those shavings that fall through the slot; I'd rather have a row of dog holes and some holdfasts. I'm working up the energy to join the two halves into a sold top.

Shavings don't bother too much, pencils, pens, hardware, and knifes do. I almost never use the split for clamps, most of the time that job is done better and faster by holdfasts and that is the biggest problem with a split top. The split is where most of the dog holes should go for my holdfasts. I expect that could be fixed by better planning of the build but the up sides of a split do not overcome the down, my next build will not be split. YMMV. BTW, there is a 140 BF of 8/8 Beech waiting to be glued up into a solid top as I type. The old split top bench will become my secondary bench once the new one is built.

[Prashun Patel]

I guess it's not; I could still put dog holes on either side of the split. All I meant was that dog holes + holdfasts would have negated the need for the split.

In fact, I underestimated the size of things I typically work on; I find myself flattening large panels and slabs fairly often. In this case, the split is poorly placed for clamping. Holes near the back would suit me better. For me the split made for marginally easier construction (although I have to be honest, I HARDLY had to flatten my ash bench after joining) but is just a nuisance for me now on a couple different levels. YMMV.

[Pat Barry]

What is the big advantage of a split top bench? It seems that it would be more of an annoyance and problem maker than problem solver. I personally like the big flat benchtop and am happy I have that.

[Prashun Patel]

The only advantage I can feel is perhaps speeding construction and perhaps ease of moving.

This latter point might a phantom benefit, though; seems like we're all looking for excuses to build our next "last bench of a lifetime." ;)

[Curt Putnam]

What is the big advantage of a split top bench? It seems that it would be more of an annoyance and problem maker than problem solver. I personally like the big flat benchtop and am happy I have that.

As I see it:

Each half of a 24" top can be run through a planer
Each half can wrestled around by geezerly types like me. Very important point for me.
The split can be filled with whatever your heart desires: tool racks, planing stops, etc. There is room in the split to run a saw for cut off duties.
Easier to take apart for a move - if need be.

I really think it all comes down to methods of work, personal preference, shop space, etc. I would prefer a solid top but I can't handle one all by myself - which is the way things are. I live in a retirement community and no one will admit to being able to lift more than 5 lbs, or bend down, or ......

[Rich Enders]

Ian,

The bench in the photo's is made from a couple of six foot halves from Veritas. They are glued up from maple, come with a center spacer, and are predrilled with 3/4 inch holes on 7 3/4 inch centers. I wrapped the entire bench with 2 by 6 maple for additional support and a little more bench area (31inches by 78 inches). Instead of legs I built solid cabinets that support the bench. The cabinets were chosen to provide storage space, but turned out to be a good support structure. Even though the slabs are only 2 inches thick, the combination of the 2 by 6's, and the support of the cabinets makes the bench rock solid.290362

In this part of Arizona we don't have much humidity to cause flatness problems, but I used it near the beach in California for years and it remained flat (and tools rusted overnight).290363290364

[Christopher Charles]

I built a split top roubo and planned on making the top solid. Instead, I decided to leave it split, with a full-sized spacer instead and have not yet removed the spacer. In fact, I jammed it in with some shims. I guess it's now a split-not roubo. Have had no issues with it staying flat, though its just under a year old.

I don't have plans to glue it solid because it is much easier to move. I don't plan to anytime soon, but would face a move the day after gluing it together...

In short, I'd do a split top again and I change my mind, it is an easy 1 hour fix.

Good luck,
C

[ian maybury]

There's a few buying various sorts of prefab slabs now it seems Rich - worktop materials and more. I even noticed somebody on the web in the US doing ready made 6 and 8ft long split top bench slabs - can't remember who. It'd be tempting except that I'm committed since I'm already looking at another big stack of beech, and on the wrong side of the Atlantic. (German beech in my case) Guess it's DIY if going for a very thick top too, although some like yourself do fine with braced but thinner versions.

To put your point another way Christopher - there's no reason I guess (other than that it leaves the top dependent on high level cross stretchers for support - which seems to work fine) not to build a top in two halves (and gain the various transportation and ease of making benefits of a split top) and butt (even bracket/bolt) them tightly together to make effectively a one piece top. Unless perhaps dog holes had to be placed on that line for some reason - and even the then the split wouldn't have to be down the middle...

My personal thinking is that the ease of making and transportation the split top brings are genuine advantages, but I'm likewise not overly excited at the thought of tool storage and or a planing stop down the middle. My instincts are more to keep the bench top clear.

I have several of these pretty cost effective and actually amazingly solid trolleys (the dowelling benefits from a bit of beefing up, but the timber is hefty) from IKEA (so much for my reputation) which i tend to park tools and tool boxes on: http://www.ikea.com/au/en/catalog/products/10240349/ It'd be easy to make a drop on top, or add a lip if needed.

I even use a couple as the outfeed table for my Hammer K3 saw...

[Tom Vanzant]

Ian, the Roubo 6' and 8' workbench slabs are 12" wide and 4" thick. They are available from Highland Woodworking in Atlanta GA. I imagine shipping costs to Ireland would be a deal-breaker.

[Rich Enders]

Ian,

Sorry I did not notice your location. We hope to visit Ireland some day. Maybe tie it in with a trip to Wimbledon.

I looked up the Roubo style bench. Very, very nice. Mine looks like a tank by comparison.

[ian maybury]

I'd have said your very nice bench is mostly the result of a slightly different line of thought on storage Rich. PM if you hit the button on the trip and think i might be able to help with some local travel advice. Bench design I guess is about practicalities, and what we (think) we need. The perennial designers' problem seems inevitable - no sooner do we commit to a design but we trip over a dozen ways we (we tend to think - usually in fact convince ourselves we're certain :) we) could have improved it. The reality is perhaps that it's a case of having to stick a peg in the sand in what is actually an evolving (and not necessarily individual) stream of thought in order to bring something into physical existence...

Another take on storage might be that a shelf as under a Roubo leaves scope to drop in whatever free standing cabinetry we think we need at a given time.

I'm lucky enough Tom to be reasonably well machine equipped so far as milling up the material for the bench is concerned, so fortunately the issue doesn't arise. It's always amazing just what is available in the US - one benefit of it being such a large market seems to be that there's reasonable business for the smallish guy doing even highly niche items. We're a country of around 3.5 million people, with no widespread high end craft or engineering tradition. About the size of a decent city in many cases. Stuff tends not to be available locally unless it's pretty mainstream...

[ken hatch]

Ian, the Roubo 6' and 8' workbench slabs are 12" wide and 4" thick. They are available from Highland Woodworking in Atlanta GA. I imagine shipping costs to Ireland would be a deal-breaker.

The cost of the slab is a deal breaker, $1000USD plus shipping for a 8' slab is a little high. It works out to over $14USD a BF. With normal burn it would take about 100 BF to make a 96"X24"X4" slab or in other words some where in the neighborhood of $500USD if you are paying full retail for new wood. Pretty good markup for a gal of glue and a few passes through the machines. BTW, I have 130+BF of beautiful 8/8 Beech for my next bench, total out the door TTL was $530USD plus a few pennies.

To keep this on topic, the new bench will not have a split top for the reasons I have posted earlier. The only real upside of a split top is ease of build in a one man shop. My plan at this time is to use draw bored loose tenons to keep the ease of build and break down but have the functionally of a solid top.

[ian maybury]

That's quite a price all right Ken..

Another issue that comes up in connection with bench tops is the positioning of the vise screws. The jaws on a twin screw need to be very deep (increasing the risk of misalignment) if the top is over 4in thick - or else (which is hard to think of doing) the bottom of the top needs slotting for the screws.

One advantage of a leg vise is that the screw can be placed low - leaving room even with a thick top for a deep version of the upper cross stretcher needed with a split top. Provided bending down to the screw isn't an issue - which may be one advantage of a hand wheel that allows you to always work off the top of it...

[Curt Putnam]

Ian, you need to check out Jim Ritter's chain set up http://ancorayachtservice.com/?page_id=196 for a leg vise. I also think that when you design your top you want to make sure that the leg vise chop bears on the leg and not the top. Otherwise there a risk of pushing the top around. IMO & YMMV

[ian maybury]

Ta Curt. Will check out the chain deal - although I ordered a criss-cross from Benchcrafted's distributor in Germany last week.

The second point is one i've not seen before. It's an argument for a strong, well fitting and deep tenon at that point.

Maybe another reason to consider the traditional through tenon approach too - although that's also to do with eliminating the need for an upper stretcher between the legs. It's very attractive looking, but i've been cautious about it - given the risk that if the top moves it may rack legs fitted with a lower stretcher, and may also cause the tenons to alternately project above and sink below the top…

An aside. Wonder if it's coincidental that while the best known picture shows that arrangement that many of the old Roubo drawings show benches without the through tenons http://www.popularwoodworking.com/workbenches/schwarz-workbenches/where-to-put-holes-for-holdfasts-one-mans-opinion Maybe the double through tenon and dovetail dates back to a time when benches and legs were built from very heavy section solid timer - maybe they didn't use lower stretchers then? Maybe the well known traditional Roubo picture shows a hybrid (maybe not even typical) arrangement that unthinkingly continued the old joint, but added stretchers http://benchcrafted.blogspot.ie/p/the-french-oak-roubo-project.html

ian

[Clay Fails]

Ian, I made the split top using Benchcrafted hardware and their plans. Mine is massive, out of rock maple. I am happy with the split top, and have the removable planing stop in the gap. Works well.

The criss cross leg vise is very smooth and functional, with incredible clamping force. You will be happy with that hardware. Many here have built thus bench, so dont hesitate to ask questions as you go.

Good luck and have fun!