Bench height

[William Fretwell]

Yes our industrious forefathers of the 17th and 18th centuries who’s woodwork established a trade and our current respect were shorter than we are today. In fact they were shorter than many previous centuries due to climate, health and economic conditions. Men born from 1650 to 1750 had a life expectancy of 35 years!

Men in England have regained their height from the medieval period and are now exceeding it.

Clearly the height of a workbench must be related to the height of the user. I have often seen 32” referred to as a ‘traditional height’ and that may well be right but those days are gone! I think the term ‘historical height’ would release people from traditional thinking.

Some people excuse this low height in today’s world with the explanation that it enables you to ‘press down’ when planning. Clearly our forefathers were not ‘pressing down’.

Lie Nielson offer heights of 32” to 38”; bravo!

So pick YOUR height and make your bench fancy if you wish because you will almost certainly get to use it past 35 years of age!

[chris carter]

Not only were they shorter, but they also tended to die long before back problems started to show up! Or poor eyesight for that matter.

I say to completely ignore all rules for bench height. Stack some wood/books/whatever on a table and pretend to work and see what’s best. Personally, I see no advantage to hunching over a bench.

FWIW, I’m 6’6” and my bench is 42” tall and it’s perfect. That’s significantly taller than any rule of thumb even taking into consideration my height.

[Derek Cohen]

Hi William

I have argued that the low bench height (for example, suggested by Chris Schwarz) is an illusion.

CS wrote about the ideal bench height being at "pinky height". Even if this was so, the reality is that we plane effectively higher than this. This is due to the way we move, and that planing takes place from the hips and not the shoulders. In planing from the hips, we "sit down" lower and, as a result, the bench height drops.

Here is an example. My bench a few years back was in line with the hem of my t-shirt ..

http://www.inthewoodshop.com/ToolReviews/VeritasCustomPlanes3_html_4831e92d.jpg

But when planing, you can see how much lower I am as my knees bend ...

http://www.inthewoodshop.com/ToolReviews/VeritasCustomPlanes3_html_m1b5d3797.jpg

http://www.inthewoodshop.com/ToolReviews/VeritasCustomPlanes3_html_6314d6fd.jpg



Since building my bench at pinky height, I have raised it a total of 4". Now it feels right.

I've written a bit about force vectors when planing. Planing from the hips means that we push horizontally and not diagonally from the shoulders ...

http://www.inthewoodshop.com/ToolReviews/VeritasCustomPlanes3_html_6ddc38fd.jpg

http://www.inthewoodshop.com/ToolReviews/VeritasCustomPlanes3_html_m68a0096.jpg

David Charlesworth ...

http://www.inthewoodshop.com/ToolReviews/VeritasCustomPlanes3_html_m12d57880.jpg

Frank Klausz ...

http://www.inthewoodshop.com/ToolReviews/VeritasCustomPlanes3_html_m2bd23430.jpghttp://www.inthewoodshop.com/ToolReviews/VeritasCustomPlanes3_html_m3ff064f2.jpg

And look how low CS gets to use his low bench!

http://www.inthewoodshop.com/ToolReviews/VeritasCustomPlanes3_html_m114e109d.jpg

Regards from Perth

Derek

[William Fretwell]

Thanks for that Derek, great pictures! Men’s arm length varies considerably so using the pinky finger is useless, not least because when planning the arms are raised so arm length is irrelevant. My arms are long so my pinky middle is 25” but I have shrunk to 6’ 1” and my bench is 38”. Having had the chance to do some work on it now I love that height.

Chris your height and bench ratios are within an inch of mine. I wear work boots with an inch heel and stand on a 1/4” rubber mat so effectively lowering my bench to 37”.

Yes planning is with the hips but my arm is not resting on my hips. The force comes from the shoulders, a mans build will change his comfort level pushing.

Without a doubt bench height is very important, give it some real thought, experiment and like Chris at 6’ 6” do what’s right for you.

[Phil Mueller]

Agree it’s an individual thing. My bench height is 34” which puts the top of my bench at about my wrist. I was following CS’s build plans and height recommendation, but made it a few inches taller (34”) knowing I could always lower it. At 34”, planning is comfortable, but the interesting thing is that when I edge plane and the stock is 2-3 inches higher than the bench height, it feels pretty good as well, maybe better. I’m tempted to raise the entire bench a few inches just to see, which would put it much higher than “standard”, if there is such a thing.

[david charlesworth]

I got my students to stand up with their back to a bench or table. The forearms held horizontal.

My advice was to choose 4 1/2" below the average measurement to the underside of the elbows.

Average can be important as some people are surprisingly lopsided!

Best wishes, David.

[William Fretwell]

David your method agrees with me. I am 1 inch lopsided! My average is 42.5” so -4.5” is exactly 38” which is my bench height!

[ken hatch]

Both your height and inseam are important. I'm 5'8" with a 30" inseam. There are five benches in my shop, the most comfortable is 34 1/2" slab to floor. The 31" bench is ok for crosscutting and planning but too low for all around use. The 35 1/2" is just a hair too tall and if it were not such a PITA to cut an inch off the legs it would have been done long ago. The other two benches come in at 33" and are almost as comfortable as the 34 1/2" bench. My "sweet spot" appears to be between 33" and 34 1/2" and all additional builds for my use will be in that range.

ken

[Graham Haydon]

What is good to see is that people are sensible enough to adjust their bench height to suit their work. Allowing a bit of room for cutting some off the legs is a good idea. People should keep in mind that every persons work varies. Some people find it useful to have a bench low, this enables them to sit on the work when required. Also some people make big pieces of work, some small. I would not draw too much from Derek's or Chris' advise, it works for them and that's great, will it work for you?

Derek's photos show people working on small sections of timber with a metal plane. How about when people work wider and or thicker material? Chris is mentioned, here is an example of him doing a classroom type example. It worth noting that when working on a wide panel, if the bench is higher then it has some extra reach trying to get there. He has no issue with reach over a wide panel because of this.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2_96gNMMc_g

Also, Paul Sellers is an advocate of a taller bench. However, the video is a likely indicator that Paul, as Derek, uses his bench for cutting joinery only, with perhaps very occasional prep of stock.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m231_HKCOWs

Also, Rob Cosman has a couple of videos working with different size boards than the small sections in Derek's photos. He clearly has a tall bench and uses his arms a lot. Something that many people say you should not do. It's worth remembering that the work we all do is quite different and how our resources vary.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GGuGFGAQTxE

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y5x65dj03C8 this one is a good example of a tall bench with a wide board showing that it can be done quite well.

Everyone has made a good point, adjust your environment to suit your work! It seems that everyone in their respective videos is quite happy.

If Warren is reading this, I would be very interested to hear his perspective. To my knowledge he is the only one here that has enjoyed a long career working by hand only and earned a living at it. Also Zach Dillinger, who also uses only hand power for his projects.

[Phil Mueller]

David, thank you, Your method would put my bench an inch higher, which is what I was thinking of trying.

[Dave Anderson NH]

David Charlesworth makes the important comment that some of us are "unusual". I know I am. I'm 5'9" but have 36" sleeves for a total wingspan 6" more than my height. I find my 28" high bench just right, particularly when using wooden planes which are taller than most modern metal planes. I choose the 28" after having a previous metal legged bench which started at 33" and over the years was slowly lowered an inch at a time to 29"which was as low as it would go.

[William Fretwell]

Dave, I’m curious if you use David’s method what height bench do you get? My wingspan is 3” greater than my height and I am 4 inches taller. That makes our finger tips 5.5 inches different but our bench heights are 10” different, even allowing for wooden planes that’s quite a difference! Perhaps it’s your upper arm adding most of your wingspan and David’s method will show more agreement?

[Tom M King]

It's not something you can figure out by measuring, and planning, or at least until you find the height that works best for you. The testing needs to be long sessions-not just a few strokes. Lower works better for wide pieces, as in flattening. Higher works better for straight line work. I'm 5'7", and use a 32" for panels, and 36" for everything else.

I've never taken any kind of personal measurements. Use something for an hour, and you'll find what doesn't work. For a few minutes, it doesn't matter much.

[ken hatch]

It's not something you can figure out by measuring, and planning, or at least until you find the height that works best for you. The testing needs to be long sessions-not just a few strokes. Lower works better for wide pieces, as in flattening. Higher works better for straight line work. I'm 5'7", and use a 32" for panels, and 36" for everything else.

I've never taken any kind of personal measurements. Use something for an hour, and you'll find what doesn't work. For a few minutes, it doesn't matter much.

Tom,

Yep, all the more reason to build more than one bench and for that matter having more than one bench in your shop. After a half dozen or so builds you may figure out what works, if you pay attention to what bugs you about the previous build :D.

ken

[Tom M King]

If I didn't already have the little Lervad, that I bought new in 1977, I probably wouldn't have two benches to work with. That one is too small, and light for many things, but is great for panels. It's easy to move around, but needs to be clamped to something, or like the picture, have a 2x4 clamped to it to abut a wall (or fireplace bricks), to keep it from sliding. I may be remembering the height incorrectly, but am pretty sure it's not over 32".

The block of wood in the vise was used as a stop to plane the 90" stiles on the edge of the bench. That made them hang over the end of the bench too far to catch a lot of the 90", so once I planed what was supported, the piece was moved to just hit the wall for the second stop. Nothing else needed to hold position for straight smooth planing.

The other one is also used as an assembly table.
401724401725

[Simon MacGowen]

Derek's photos show people working on small sections of timber with a metal plane. How about when people work wider and or thicker material? Chris is mentioned, here is an example of him doing a classroom type example. It worth noting that when working on a wide panel, if the bench is higher then it has some extra reach trying to get there. He has no issue with reach over a

Excellent observation here. If you do both types of work a lot, you need an adjustable bench (or a lower bench for planing wider boards and for assembly, and raise it up when needed). Otherwise, pick a height that suits the type of work you do most.

Simon

[lowell holmes]

I thought a bench should be at your knuckles height.

[William Fretwell]

In my case that would be knuckles plus 7” to get my bench height so not even close.

[chris carter]

Enlighted me. Why would someone want a LOWER bench for planning wider boards? That just doesn’t make sense to me. The lower your bench, the lower the angle of your arms, the less distance you can cover with the plane, thus making you bend over to increase the reach. The higher the bench, the higher the angle of your arms, the greater distance you can cover without having to make up all that distance by hunching over wasting energy and putting strain on your back. Granted, at a certain point as the bench gets higher you lose a certain amount of power (and a good vision angle). However, the opposite is also inefficient because you lose power when your arms are angled too far down so you have to bend your knees excessively to raise the angle of your arms to generate enough power – that’s also a waste of energy and depending on how much sports you did as a youngster, hard on your knees.

Now I have absolutely no education that would entitle me to throw out this hypothesis, but I’ll throw it out there anyway in hopes someone else here knows something. I would propose that the best height for any type of planning where you maximize power vs. energy and minimize excessive knee bending and back hunching in order to be more comfortable, would be a bench height where your arms are at 45 degrees. Right after typing that sentence I went into my basement, put a piece of ¾ on the bench, plopped a plane on it, grabbed it and backed up until my arm was completely straight. The angle was 43 degrees. This was with a wooden plane, so I’d imagine a few degrees higher for a metal bodied plane. I honestly had never thought of this before, and certainly not when I made my bench. But perhaps this explains why I’m so happy with my bench height!

Okay, someone with a kinesiology degree, please explain this stuff!!

[Graham Haydon]

Hi Chris. One of the chaps in our shop has his bench up very high, about 42 inches. It's just harder to reach over but is better for close up work in the vice. I'm happy enough with the other benches that are about 34 > 36. As Tom mentioned, the only way you can work out what works well for you is to do some work and find out. If you're comfortable, effective and happy in your work your likely doing it right. I would like to hear Warren's feedback, however I'm sure he has better things to do!

Thanks, Simon :)

[James Pallas]

Unless you are working on dining tables and desk tops, or work benches like Ken Hatch all of the time I don't see the fuss about height. If a panel is less than 30" or so I like to work across the bench or off the end for planing. I find it easier to move along the panel than reach out sideways. For the rare occasions, for me, that I need to work long wide panels I break out my sturdy sawhorses and brace the up a bit with diagonals and clamps. I'm about 5'8" and like the bench to be 38". I do have an Adjust a Bench now but for the most part it stays at 38 1/2". Most of the work I do is joinery type now. It's easier to see when you are closer to it. I do hate to bend over to work.
Jim

[Monte Milanuk]

Does the type/style of plane used enter into the equation?

Seems like when a lot of these 'standards' were established, people were using wooden body planes that tend to sit higher, and have less mass, than the equivalent metal body hand planes...

[Alexander Zagubny]

Not only were they shorter, but they also tended to die long before back problems started to show up! Or poor eyesight for that matter.

I say to completely ignore all rules for bench height. Stack some wood/books/whatever on a table and pretend to work and see what’s best. Personally, I see no advantage to hunching over a bench.

FWIW, I’m 6’6” and my bench is 42” tall and it’s perfect. That’s significantly taller than any rule of thumb even taking into consideration my height.

I'll second that. 6'1" tall and 40" bench surrogate. I used to have it about 8" lower but like 40" much more. No back pain and better sight on the piece.
However now I tend to use Veritas bevel up jack a lot and I like it's weight. Not sure what is it related the most, probably a bit of everything. BUJ offers more upright handle, lower profile and center of mass. And more convenient and precise blade adjustment. It's probably better suited for high benches or that might be unrelated shift in my preferences (realized that I prefer woodworking to restoring planes).

[Jens Hoffmann]

And that's why I have two benches: One for joinery work, where I want to have my stock higher at almost elbow height - and one for stock prep work, which is lower (32.5" - I am 6'1"). Planing lower feels a lot more comfortable to me. Sawing higher feels a lot more comfortable to me. I chose the height of my joinery bench so that my elbow would be at a 90 degree angle when sawing with my sash saw.
Your mileage may vary.

[William Fretwell]

Thanks Jens, you clearly had a definite methodology to your height choice. I too played around with saws, but mostly planes to get my height choice. You don’t say what your joinery bench ended up at, just curious?

[Zach Dillinger]

I'm 6'5" and my bench is 33" tall. I sit down while doing detail work so the low height has never been a problem for me.

[lowell holmes]

Well, you can make your bench higher than you expect and then cut the legs off to suit you after you make your mind up.

Or, if your bench is too low, you can block it up to suit.

[Jens Hoffmann]

Thanks Jens, you clearly had a definite methodology to your height choice. I too played around with saws, but mostly planes to get my height choice. You don’t say what your joinery bench ended up at, just curious?

Sorry about that. I think the joinery bench is 41" high but I will verify when I get home. It's about 40" wide and 30" deep

[Hasin Haroon]

I'll be a contrarian in this thread - my first bench was 36" high (I'm around 5' 10") as I just couldn't bring myself to build a bench around 32" high (which is what the pinky rule would suggest I think). I recently completed my second bench, and made it 32" high, and much prefer it. I find I can use the force of my legs more than my upper body, so extended planing is less tiring - I wish I'd made my first bench lower. Of course, the caveat is that you bend more, which, if you are older or have a bad back may not be ideal.

[James Pallas]

Wasn't it just a couple of years ago that all the Moxon and bench on bench stuff was all the rage for making it easier to see for joinery? Lower benches may be an advantage for planing long and wide wide boards or doing all the milling work without machinery. Could be a planing beam and a higher bench for the rest of the work would be better. I don't think a single bench can do it all well or that one size fits all. My pinky could be 3 or 4 inches higher or lower than yours.
Jim

[ken hatch]

Wasn't it just a couple of years ago that all the Moxon and bench on bench stuff was all the rage for making it easier to see for joinery? Lower benches may be an advantage for planing long and wide wide boards or doing all the milling work without machinery. Could be a planing beam and a higher bench for the rest of the work would be better. I v think a single bench can do it all well or that one size fits all. My pinky could be 3 or 4 inches higher or lower than yours.
Jim

Jim,

Never could figure out how to work with just one bench :D, besides benches are fun to build.

ken

[Timothy MacMurtrie]

My bench is 36” from floor to bench top which is right at my wrist joint and it’s fantastic
My planes are flat square and straight and produce flat straight faces and edges
I don’t agree with pushing down I feel you lose some control and it’s uncomfortable but to each his own
Oh and just for info sake I’m 6’1”

[Thomas Wilson]

To plane properly, one must have a collarless shirt and a vest. One must squat upon one's planes as if it would take flight at less resistance.

[Kris Cook]

When I built my bench two years ago I agonized over the height. I seem to remember based on recommendations, wrist height being the target - for me that would have been 33". I built the bench at 35" because intuitively it seemed a little higher would be better, and it is comfortable to use. I did take a cup out of a 16" wide by 72" Doug Fir slab with a scrub plane a while back, and what arguably is a taller than "recommended" bench height wasn't a problem. I don't really have room for two benches so for me, getting it right was fairly critical.