I Don't Need No Stinkin End Vise

[ken hatch]

The bench before this last bench had a wagon vise, the ones before that had several different single or twin screw metal vises. As I planned this bench build I realized the only times I had used the wagon vise were when it was new and then only to try it out, a new toy don'tchknow. I made the decision to leave the vice in the tail position off the new build. The new bench has been in use for well over a year and not once have I thought "Gee whiilkers I wish I'd included a tail vise".

As always with all things wood....YMMV. Here's a photo of the bench in use where a tail vise might be used. I think the use of a batten and holdfast is better but...see above :).



http://i257.photobucket.com/albums/hh222/VTXAZ/bathCabinetPanelB20150928_zpsv8bpxrwh.jpg

ken

[ian maybury]

Hi Ken. How do you hold a narrow board to plane it lengthwise? In that case the holdfast would have to go where you want to plane.

I've seen various stop at the far end, and 90deg notched board secured at 45 deg using a holdfast at the other, but wonder about it's ability to hold in all directions?

[Matthew N. Masail]

No doubt one can get along without a tail\wagon vise. in MANY different ways some of which can be batter for a given operation. but for me having a wagon vise sure does come in handy, I like dogging things down.

[Jim Koepke]

Everyone has there own way to do things which make woodworking such fun.

My tail vise gets more use than my face vise. It has to do with how the bench is oriented in my shop.

With my simple (racking) vise it is easy to use an Anti Rack Spacer Stack (http://www.sawmillcreek.org/showthread.php?183743-Anti-Rack-Spacer-Stack) to regulate the vise movement so it doesn't make thin stock bow.

There are also a lot of Holding Without a Vise (http://www.sawmillcreek.org/showthread.php?223428-Holding-Without-A-Vise) methods to hold work.

If a lot of pieces of the same size need to be worked, it is often faster to use battens instead of a vise.

jtk

[ken hatch]

Hi Ken. How do you hold a narrow board to plane it lengthwise? In that case the holdfast would have to go where you want to plane.

I've seen various stop at the far end, and 90deg notched board secured at 45 deg using a holdfast at the other, but wonder about it's ability to hold in all directions?

Ian,

It depend on how narrow and face or edge. For narrow edge I sometimes use the face vise and a support board on the apron. If it is wide enough to stand but still narrow I will sometimes use a "V" stop, 19mm or more, depending on height, any stop works. For face planing, stops with either battens and/or a doe's foot works very well. I will usually go for a "loose" board method if able, less chance of distorting the board.

ken

[Graham Haydon]

Nice Ken, I've been working on just planing against a stop lately on narrow strips and it seems a good option. i fully agree about working on a board with no tension on it. Again it needs a bit of practice but at least you know it's not going to spring under clamping pressure.

[ken hatch]

Nice Ken, I've been working on just planing against a stop lately on narrow strips and it seems a good option. i fully agree about working on a board with no tension on it. Again it needs a bit of practice but at least you know it's not going to spring under clamping pressure.

Graham,

I think it is worth the effort in feedback alone and most of the time it is much quicker to work loose boards.

ken

[Frederick Skelly]

I use the same setup as you Ken. I use holdfasts plus various "appliances" to address specific cases - thin strips, narrow strips, etc - but no tail vise. So far I've been able to do everything I need.

BTW, that sure is a nice bench!
Fred

[ian maybury]

Thanks Ken. It's a great thread to promote some lateral thinking.

Pardon what might seem like a hijack, but it brings some generalised philosophical points (that say nothing about how anybody in particular works) to mind.

Like all things woodworking the hard part is that it's often necessary to try out all the better looking options to enable a decision on the best solution for lots of things. Which is highly labour intensive.

Yet the other polarity (of repetition - 'this is how it's done and has always been done, so shut up and just do it') has major downsides. (and i'd hate to have to work to the prescribed methods all of the time)

A compromise might be that we try methods in a structured way, precisely define the situations where a given one works well - and then pass the information into some sort of central repository for sharing.

It's all very well being self sufficient and independent minded (and without it discoveries don't get made), but it's equally the case that we don't each have long enough to live to reinvent every 'wheel' we encounter.

We're these days societally and mentally programmed to innovate, but it's actually scary how many solutions must get lost in the resulting whirl. There's a very fine line between 'conservation of knowledge' and getting caught up in an unhealthy stasis. The really scary bit is perhaps that an awful lots of the factors that might make it possible to strike the right balance depend heavily on pretty much all of the players behaving in a trustworthy manner. That's behaving in a manner that demonstrates ability/competence, goodwill/benevolence, integrity/honesty and predictability…. (this is one definition of the factors underlying trust)

It's interesting to think that maybe a forum like this is an early progenitor of a system of this sort…..

[Reinis Kanders]

I put dogholes about an inch from the edge for my new tail vise and I find it works well for a lot of small things where I previously had to use a variation of a sticking board. Also was planing and 1/8 inch thin piece and tailvise was pretty handy for that.

[ken hatch]

I use the same setup as you Ken. I use holdfasts plus various "appliances" to address specific cases - thin strips, narrow strips, etc - but no tail vise. So far I've been able to do everything I need.

BTW, that sure is a nice bench!
Fred

Thanks Fred,

It, the bench, has been a joy to use from the get go. I would not advocate its design for others although I will advise new bench builders to build a simple, cheap bench to start, one you can modify to see what works and to plan on building several. Then over several bench builds and mods find what works for your personal work flow. Once you have a good idea build your Taj-Mabench. This is my Taj-Mabench. It has everything I need but nothing extra to get in the way, after a year or so of use there is nothing I would change.

ken

[ken hatch]

Thanks Ken. It's a great thread to promote some lateral thinking.

Pardon what might seem like a hijack, but it brings some generalised philosophical points (that say nothing about how anybody in particular works) to mind.

Like all things woodworking the hard part is that it's often necessary to try out all the better looking options to enable a decision on the best solution for lots of things. Which is highly labour intensive.

Yet the other polarity (of repetition - 'this is how it's done and has always been done, so shut up and just do it') has major downsides. (and i'd hate to have to work to the prescribed methods all of the time)

A compromise might be that we try methods in a structured way, precisely define the situations where a given one works well - and then pass the information into some sort of central repository for sharing.

It's all very well being self sufficient and independent minded (and without it discoveries don't get made), but it's equally the case that we don't each have long enough to live to reinvent every 'wheel' we encounter.

We're these days societally and mentally programmed to innovate, but it's actually scary how many solutions must get lost in the resulting whirl. There's a very fine line between 'conservation of knowledge' and getting caught up in an unhealthy stasis. The really scary bit is perhaps that an awful lots of the factors that might make it possible to strike the right balance depend heavily on pretty much all of the players behaving in a trustworthy manner. That's behaving in a manner that demonstrates ability/competence, goodwill/benevolence, integrity/honesty and predictability…. (this is one definition of the factors underlying trust)

It's interesting to think that maybe a forum like this is an early progenitor of a system of this sort…..

Ian,

I don't think it's a hijack, most of the reason for the post was a tongue in cheek post about other ways of holding work. While the bones of my bench are French, the skin is English. The English method of holding wood was highly evolved over time and efficient. Its simplicity appeals to me.

ken

[ken hatch]

Everyone has there own way to do things which make woodworking such fun.

My tail vise gets more use than my face vise. It has to do with how the bench is oriented in my shop.

With my simple (racking) vise it is easy to use an Anti Rack Spacer Stack (http://www.sawmillcreek.org/showthread.php?183743-Anti-Rack-Spacer-Stack) to regulate the vise movement so it doesn't make thin stock bow.

There are also a lot of Holding Without a Vise (http://www.sawmillcreek.org/showthread.php?223428-Holding-Without-A-Vise) methods to hold work.

If a lot of pieces of the same size need to be worked, it is often faster to use battens instead of a vise.

jtk

Jim,

I made a 'board claw", it works well but I don't use it. It is in my bench appliance pile under the bench and I expect some day I may run into a holding problem that it would be the perfect solution. Whatever, it is a perfect example of letting physics and/or gravity work for you.

ken

[Mike Holbrook]

I plan to use a tail vise. In my case, part of the reason for the tail vise has to do with holding things to the side of the bench, as the side of the tail vise will have dog holes as well as the top. Maybe there are uses for a tail vise other than clamping objects to the top of a bench for working board faces. I expect I will clamp chair seats for carving...

[Steve Voigt]

Yet the other polarity (of repetition - 'this is how it's done and has always been done, so shut up and just do it') has major downsides. (and i'd hate to have to work to the prescribed methods all of the time)



Hi Ian,

What are the downsides?

Can you think of a specific example--just one example--of a traditional technique or method that isn't highly efficient/effective?

I'm betting you can't, but I'll give you full marks if you can surprise me.

[Mike Siemsen]

Here is a link to a you tube video I made showing workholding without any vise. It covers a lot of options that are useful whether or not you have a vise.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yvhn-PAfEW4

[Matthew N. Masail]

Mike, I've watched that video of your several times and love it! I need to build 5 or so benches, two of them double sided) for students in the coming months, do you find students get along well with this type of bench? I can't see why not but a vise sure is easy (and expensive...)

[Matthew N. Masail]

Thanks Ken. It's a great thread to promote some lateral thinking.

Pardon what might seem like a hijack, but it brings some generalised philosophical points (that say nothing about how anybody in particular works) to mind.

Like all things woodworking the hard part is that it's often necessary to try out all the better looking options to enable a decision on the best solution for lots of things. Which is highly labour intensive.

Yet the other polarity (of repetition - 'this is how it's done and has always been done, so shut up and just do it') has major downsides. (and i'd hate to have to work to the prescribed methods all of the time)

A compromise might be that we try methods in a structured way, precisely define the situations where a given one works well - and then pass the information into some sort of central repository for sharing.

It's all very well being self sufficient and independent minded (and without it discoveries don't get made), but it's equally the case that we don't each have long enough to live to reinvent every 'wheel' we encounter.

We're these days societally and mentally programmed to innovate, but it's actually scary how many solutions must get lost in the resulting whirl. There's a very fine line between 'conservation of knowledge' and getting caught up in an unhealthy stasis. The really scary bit is perhaps that an awful lots of the factors that might make it possible to strike the right balance depend heavily on pretty much all of the players behaving in a trustworthy manner. That's behaving in a manner that demonstrates ability/competence, goodwill/benevolence, integrity/honesty and predictability…. (this is one definition of the factors underlying trust)

It's interesting to think that maybe a forum like this is an early progenitor of a system of this sort…..

Ian, with all due respect, I cannot help but feel that maybe your thinking out some other issue by using this subject as a tennis wall. either that or your seriously tripping and should be spending some more time cutting wood!

simply work-holding and I bet the most happy people are the ones who figured out how to hold their work so they could get on with it, which ever way it might be - even one's foot like the Japanese!

[ian maybury]

Just my getting philosophical again Matthew - no problem. I of course used Ken's post as an opportunity to bounce some big picture points. It did a great job of opening up alternative perspectives on work holding that won't be familiar to many - and was pitched in a slightly provocative tone which to my mind as well as inviting discussion of specific methods suggested that an end vise wasn't necessary. My immediate thought was 'how in heaven is the punter supposed to decide between the alternatives?' Which prompted some philosophical/big picture musings on the matter of how we (in general) evaluate alternative tools and methods.

It's easy to mutter about our just needing to 'figure out how to hold our work and get on with it', but there as they say lies the rub.

Workable alternatives are great (as Ken's), but how are these to be evauated against other possibilities (conventional vises etc in this case), never mind against inaccurate advice and overblown claims from vested interests which can really muddy the water. Just how is the mythical woodworker supposed to 'figure out' whatever it is and get working without as so often happens getting burned, running a never ending testing programme or screwing up?

I wasn't saying Steve that old isn't good, and certainly wasn't adopting an anti conservation position - there's probably a gazillion very useful methods that have been lost to us as a result of the less than optimum/somewhat haphazard means i also described by which we undertake our innovation. Against that if there was no improvement we'd probably still be scraping spear points from sticks using flints, or maybe even relying on just picking up what we found lying about.

Even when we conserve we innovate - I doubt there's much 'traditional' in use today that precisely replicates how it was done in its 'day'. We seem also to ignore large swathes of time, and instead to cherry pick methods from specific eras. The ubiquitous 'olde' Stanley plane for example is in the big picture a recent industrial phenomenon. Neither our conservation nor our innovation anyway deliver optimum results - great old stuff gets lost, great new stuff is ignored, rubbish gets pushed as the latest and greatest, and the wheel is re-invented time and again.

I just floated the thought that there is perhaps room for improvement. That we could greatly up the effective return on our innovation if we could somehow establish a system that would enable us to better evaluate alternatives, and in doing so regularly strike a better balance between conservation and innovation. i.e. recognise what we have that's good and not throw it away, and equally make sure that what's new is genuinely an improvement. And effectively communicate the results.

It's not just a technical capability issue. There's also the conflicting ego, commercial and other motivations as above that can get in the mix and act to confuse the picture. Hence the added thought that trustworthiness (i used a very technical definition which combines reliable delivery of practical results with goodwill and integrity) is also central to our better getting our act together...

[ken hatch]

Here is a link to a you tube video I made showing workholding without any vise. It covers a lot of options that are useful whether or not you have a vise.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yvhn-PAfEW4

Mike,

I cite and link your video often. It is one of the best.

ken

[Mike Brady]

http://i234.photobucket.com/albums/ee300/finefettle/IMG_0405_zpswgjdrzfq.jpg (http://s234.photobucket.com/user/finefettle/media/IMG_0405_zpswgjdrzfq.jpg.html)

[Steve Voigt]

I wasn't saying Steve that old isn't good…


I didn't think you were, but you implied, as you often do, that folks who adhere to traditional methods do so blindly or slavishly, simply following the way it's "always" been done. Whereas I'd rather see most traditional techniques as mature technologies that are the result of hundreds of years of innovation and experimentation. On the far side of history, we only see the very best ideas that one, not the zillions of bad ones that have already been tried…anyway, I was asking for specific examples of traditional techniques that you think are inefficient, and I notice you didn't come up with any. Well, if you think of something, let me know…

[ian maybury]

Thanks Steve. Yes and no from this end. We'd agree on the traditional as we experience it in large part being mature technologies resulting from long innovation and experimentation. We'd agree too that those methods that survive (even if they often enjoy the advantage of some modern 'tweaks') tend to be tried and tested, and to work very well - and be highly equipment and resource effective.

This was why I avoided answering your question - because doing so might have seemed to place me in some sort of knee jerk anti camp trying to argue that traditional methods are often rubbish. Which they most certainly are not. Rarely so in fact, and normally only when taken out of appropriate context.

They aren't necessarily always the answer to the maiden's prayer either, but that's true of all methods of work new and old. Conclusions are inevitably heavily dependent on the assessment criteria and the situation - a given method may be perceived as being more or less optimum depending on the situation and beliefs of the perceiver.

What I do imply at times is that there's likely a proportion of the trad woodworking faction that's in it less for its hard utility/efficiency and more for 'soft' reasons of one sort or another. As in many areas of life these days - look at stuff like the transition of motorcycling from utility transport to become for some a tribal lifestyle - or a matter of bragging rights, or just simple fun, or whatever....

This is no problem either, it's a great way of trialling, recycling and improving traditional activities that would otherwise likely have been lost - and of bringing more nuanced sets of requirements to bear than was perhaps the case first time around. Guess it's important that sight of the utility/productive efficiency of methods isn't lost though.

All i was trying to point up above in response to the thread (but at a tangent to the thrust of what you and also Ken posted) is that this mutiplicity of perspectives tends to greatly muddy the water for the woodworking punter trying to decide where to invest his/her resources - that the way we (in the most general sense possible - it's a societal rather than a woodworking matter) collect and utilise the information resulting from activities like these is far from optimum or efficient...

[Mike Holbrook]

Isn't it frequently hard to actually know what is "traditional" vs "new innovation"? There is the expression that there is nothing new under the sun, but companies like Apple seem to me to dispel that line of reasoning. I have an appreciation for old "traditional" ways of doing things, which seems to increase the older I get. At the same time in terms of my life work experience I went from ridding the wave of innovation brought by digital data communications to trying to rediscover how to communicate with "man's best friend" dogs, which ultimately are wolves. So It is just a little weird to use modern digital communication to try to better understand how animals communicate at the most basic levels often via genetically inherited traits. My point in this context is, just by posting on SMC we are creating records that may reach untold numbers of people. No telling how long these records may last or how they may be accessed in the future. There seems to me to be little that guys who research the history of woodworking can absolutely agree on. History, to my knowledge, is not all that definable in absolute terms. Science and the scientific method, are often considered the ultimate proof. Then there is the modern scientific philosophy that all scientific research has proven one thing, research always reflects the prejudices of the researchers.

It seems to me that we all have to find our own "truths", which may not hold true at all for the guy standing next to us. Still I think we all try to offer up what we find to be "true" in the hope that it may benefit others.

[Bob Glenn]

Ken, I kept the tail vise on my new bench, however, I left off the calculator. Just sayin. Bob

[James Pallas]

This is all about how one works. If a person is building furniture mortise and tenon work, or variations lap joints, bridles etc. and dove tails are the most used joints. Rabbets and groves are probably next. If you have a tail vise and a shoulder vise most of this work is done facing the bench or with bench dogs. Even marking out dove tails is done flat on the bench. All of the other holding things are done by adapting something like Paul Sellers and his clamping or using battens. Just my opinion. If I were to build another bench a shoulder and tail vise would be included.
Jim

[ken hatch]

This is all about how one works. If a person is building furniture mortise and tenon work, or variations lap joints, bridles etc. and dove tails are the most used joints. Rabbets and groves are probably next. If you have a tail vise and a shoulder vise most of this work is done facing the bench or with bench dogs. Even marking out dove tails is done flat on the bench. All of the other holding things are done by adapting something like Paul Sellers and his clamping or using battens. Just my opinion. If I were to build another bench a shoulder and tail vise would be included.
Jim

James,

You broke the code. There are many ways of working wood, no right way for everyone.

A shoulder vise and a tail vise on my bench would drive me bat poo crazy in a Texas minute but they are perfect for you and I expect that is true for more folks than folks like me who like an English style bench.

As always with all things wood....YMMV.

ken

[ken hatch]

Ken, I kept the tail vise on my new bench, however, I left off the calculator. Just sayin. Bob

Bob,

Busted....I guess I need to put one of my old slide rules on the bench for Neander photo ops. At my age I need something, "Let's see half of 10mm is? Oh heck where is the calculator".

ken

[Nicholas Lawrence]

An excellent video. When I build a better bench that design will definitely be in the mix.

[ian maybury]

Hi Mike, ta for that. You got it. Seeming 'fact' is so very slippery, because what gets communicated depends so heavily on the perception (in turn largely determined by the motivation and situation) of the reader/receiver and the writer/communicator. Even when a hugely capable person like Ken goes to considerable trouble to put up 100% solid material to communicate his experience of an important set of working methods that many of us are not familiar with.

Who knows (i've no idea how it can be otherwise) what transmits by the time readers in very widely differing situations get involved?

Then consider the scenario we encounter in life where more often than not there's an agenda involved, and the priority (consciously or unconsciously) shifts to 'selling' the punter over accurate communication of information.

We're so used to trying to navigate through the resulting fog that we tend to want to just 'get on with it' (as best we can extract our own take on the 'best' way forward for ourself and our own), but it's a huge practical issue anywhere that precise communication of knowledge with minimum distortion and waste is required. One with potentially very serious implications for a lot more in human affairs than just woodworking..

[Robert Engel]

I'll be building my "last" workbench this year I was pretty set on the Scandinavian style (Klausz) with shoulder vice and traditional end vise......BUT

rather than get hung up on tradition, now I'm leaning toward a Roubo style with wagon vise and knee vise.

But "don't need no stinking vice" on a ww'ing bench?

I've tried planing boards 2"X50" with nothing but a stop block -> I'd rather have it secured firmly.

To each his own.

I get what you're saying but I wouldn't recommend a newB ww'er thinking he doesn't need a vice on his workbench.

[Bob Glenn]

Bob,

Busted....I guess I need to put one of my old slide rules on the bench for Neander photo ops. At my age I need something, "Let's see half of 10mm is? Oh heck where is the calculator".



Come on, Ken, Dividers..........dividers and a sector. Bob

[Allan Speers]

Here is a link to a you tube video I made showing workholding without any vise. It covers a lot of options that are useful whether or not you have a vise.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yvhn-PAfEW4


Mike, this video just blew my mind!

I especially like your point about how not having the stock locked tight, you get feedback as you work.

I was just going to rebuild my tail vise, but I've got some thinking / decisions to make now.

Also, where are plans to make those cool little recessed stops?

[ken hatch]

I'll be building my "last" workbench this year I was pretty set on the Scandinavian style (Klausz) with shoulder vice and traditional end vise......BUT

rather than get hung up on tradition, now I'm leaning toward a Roubo style with wagon vise and knee vise.

But "don't need no stinking vice" on a ww'ing bench?

I've tried planing boards 2"X50" with nothing but a stop block -> I'd rather have it secured firmly.

To each his own.

I get what you're saying but I wouldn't recommend a newB ww'er thinking he doesn't need a vice on his workbench.

Robert,

Did you use a doe's foot on the when planing the 50mm X1250mm boards? :)

I hear you, every one works differently....The main thing is to work.

ken

[ken hatch]

Come on, Ken, Dividers..........dividers and a sector. Bob

Bob,

Not just busted but double busted:)

[Mike Siemsen]

Matthew,
Most students get along fine with this type of bench. It is easy to add a face vise either a leg vise or a regular woodworking vise. Plan ahead if you use the metal bench vise so you don't have cross bearers in the way when you attach the vise. I find a tail vise isn't needed. I am working on an article for Pop wood on an inexpensive leg vise. that is probably a few months out yet.

[Mike Siemsen]

The stop is just a piece of 1/4 x 3/4 x 1 steel cut at an angle and screwed to the top of a dowel with a stout long screw. I have since come up with an improved version using an elevator bolt. it eliminates the screw and is stronger, it just takes a bit of grinding.

[Peter Aeschliman]

Mike, thanks for your video. It really changed my perspective as I'm in the early phases of designing a workbench.