Anarchist workbench?

[Monte Milanuk]

Having followed some of the workbench 'trends' over the years... from Roubo to Nicholson to Moravian... I'm a little surprised that when I search around on various forums, there seem to be surprisingly few (as in, almost none) examples of Schwarz's "anarchist workbench" floating around in the wild.

Was / Is it a flop for some reason I missed? Or is it generally considered just another iteration of the classic Roubo design?

[David Bassett]

First, the book has only been out about a year, not a lot of time for many to be built.

Second it is, really, advice about how to build a Roubo at a minimum expense. I'm sure many people who use it would identify their results as a Roubo-style bench and not make explicit reference to the source of the plans.

Third, he often doesn't give explicit directions, but rather advice on how to optimize it to your circumstances. (E.g. buying the local wood that's cheapest per pound so you maximize the mass for stability. For him that's Southern Yellow Pine, but he doesn't make it a recipe to tell me to get SYP.)

[David Publicover]

I referenced the book when I built my bench last spring. I also looked at other designs and made a hybrid that works for me. I found The Anarchist Workbench plans very helpful for sorting some dimensions and layout. I consider mine a modified Roubo. It’s made of hardwood and has a tail vice.

[chris carter]

I wouldn’t consider the Anarchist’s Workbench another iteration of the classic Roubo – I’d call it an almost exact copy of the bench depicted in Roubo’s book. Doesn’t get much more classic than that, unless you want to go before Roubo. Roubo obviously didn’t invent the bench. People had been using benches like that; he just documented it in a book that became popular and has stood the test of time – so we call the bench a “Roubo.” I would consider an iteration of the Roubo to be something like a split-top, or incorporating a twin-screw end-vise, or something like that.

[Jim Koepke]

If anyone is interested a free .pdf of the book is available here > https://blog.lostartpress.com/2020/07/06/now-available-for-free-the-anarchists-workbench/

My recollection of posts on SMC was the discussion of using inexpensive local woods for making benches.

jtk

[Aaron Liebling]

It was my major guide in building my first bench. I'm sure I'm not alone.

[Don Dorn]

I really went rogue - bought the video for the Schwarz Two-Day workbench. The leg system is massive but the bench top is two 1.5" butcher block counters (25" x 8') laminated. It replaced a shorter one and frankly, I love it it. Stays flat, have learned where to put the dogs and where not to in order to keep shavings out. Face vise and tail vice which is right for me. Simple but have no plans to upgrade as I don't know what it would be.

[Edward Weber]

Well, My name isn't Schwarz, I don't care for the Roubo design and I'm not a 16th century French woodworker, other than that, the bench is probably fine.

Schwarz has been banging on about his workbench rules for probably 15 years or so and never once has he asked anyone that i can tell, "what type of woodworking do you do ?". You know, so maybe you could build one for your own needs, crazy right.
Not everyone needs or wants a bench made from 6" or 8" timbers, no matter how much Schwarz gets excited about it.
A Roubo or clone is not the "perfect" bench, the perfect bench is different for everyone.

I just recently saw that the Wood Whisperer is auctioning his Roubo off because it doesn't fit his needs.

I suggest,
1. think about your own method of work and needs
2. size it to your own body and shop
3. base it on a style you like and can afford
You have to use it after all.
Sorry for the rant

[Bob Betker]

Have you read any of his books on workbenches? Throughout every one, he talks about finding the style of bench that works for you and I doubt that he would argue with any of your three design principals. Schwarz is primarily a hand tool enthusiast and a result favors a bench that is conducive to that style. I think anyone reading his books would realize that. I know that in his videos and talks, he describes the process of using various bench styles over the years and how the Roubo style works for him.

If you watch Marc Spagnuolo's (The Wood Whisperer) video, you would have realized that his new bench is based on a Roubo just modified to fit his needs. It's not like he disowned the Roubo style, his new one is somewhat smaller, able to be broken down, and has an electrical outlet and cheaper vises.

I will grant you that Schwarz can be somewhat doctrinaire in his opposition to tool trays and storage cabinets under the bench top. I figure everyone is allowed to have their own little pet peeves.

[Scott Winners]

With moderate terpidation I will dip my toe. I built mine after Chris' first book was publushed, but before the second one came out.

Specific to the OP question, the exact work bench in the Anarchist Work Bench design book is optimized for the work Chris does and is (my opinion) a good design to look at when coming up with the exact design that will work best for you the reader/ user/ builder.

Specific to that most recent design I think (my opinion) a fair number of folks are intimidated by the mortise and tenon joints to connect the top to the legs, and also (still my opinion) intimidated by having to flatten the entire bench top with hand planes.

The most common son of Anarchy bench I see here - and I have been desperately short of free time since March 2019 - is a split top Roubo that allows the two slabs to be run through a lunch box planer and allows the two slabs to be fastened to the undercarriage with lag bolts.

[Edward Weber]

Everyone is perfectly free to build what they want.
I try to look, listen, watch and read whatever I can get my hands on before I build a project but at the end of the day, it's my bench. I have my own considerations on design and they don't always align with what the "experts" say. After all, the "experts" are no different than you or I, they build what works for them, I build what works for me. If I did the same type of things Mr. Schwarz does, our design might be similar, though somehow I doubt it.

To the OP's point, why you don't see many of them.
I don't know for sure but I think Scott Winners touched on a few of the major points. Building a Roubo style bench is a pretty big undertaking for many. The size and weight of the lumber alone is intimidating for some. The price may scare off others.
As I was attempting to point out, these benches are simply not for everyone. My example of the Wood Whispers is just that, an example of someone who built a large Roubo and later realized it was not a good fit for what he does. I can only guess there are others who have come to the same realization.
Mr. Schwarz, regardless of your opinion, has been chasing his perfect bench for 20+ years and may not have found it yet. Most woodworkers don't have the luxury of building a new bench every couple of years or when he updates his design. Maybe that's why we don't see many of the new ones.
So, if at the end of the day, if he would agree with my design principles, I'll go my own way.
JMO

[Jim Koepke]

[edited]
Schwarz has been banging on about his workbench rules for probably 15 years or so and never once has he asked anyone that i can tell, "what type of woodworking do you do ?". You know, so maybe you could build one for your own needs, crazy right.


From Chapter IV (page 33) of the Anarchist Workbench:




But before we start comparing one bench design to another, it’s a
good time to think about what type of woodworker you are and what
kind of woodworker you hope to be. Because that little bit of dimestore
psychology can help you make some important decisions.
[jump]
So as you choose the form of workbench you want to build or buy,
consider the tradition your work falls into. This will help you narrow
your choices and perhaps avoid building three wrong benches before
you get it right.

(bolding and underlining is mine)

Looks like he does cover building one's own bench for the needs of an individual's pursuits.

jtk

[Edward Weber]

I stand corrected, thank you

I have to say that the end of the paragraph is pretty funny considering the source

"This will help you narrow your choices and perhaps avoid building three wrong benches before
you get it right."

[chris carter]

I don't think Schwarz kept building benches because he never found one he could enjoy using. He has previously referenced a number of benches he likes. He just finds benches interesting so he keeps building them. And given his occupation, it helps pay the bills - so there's some good incentive there.

[Edward Weber]

I don't think Schwarz kept building benches because he never found one he could enjoy using. He has previously referenced a number of benches he likes. He just finds benches interesting so he keeps building them. And given his occupation, it helps pay the bills - so there's some good incentive there.


Yes, no doubt, the same goes for his tool chests.
It's just that we're all not in that same boat.

[Jim Koepke]

I don't think Schwarz kept building benches because he never found one he could enjoy using. He has previously referenced a number of benches he likes. He just finds benches interesting so he keeps building them. And given his occupation, it helps pay the bills - so there's some good incentive there.


Yes, no doubt, the same goes for his tool chests.
It's just that we're all not in that same boat.

He gets a pretty penny for the chests he builds. The same for all the chairs he has built.

Like the benches he builds, some of it is for the money, some of it is for the learning. Building a low, Roman staked bench likely incorporates mechanical properties that can be applied to his building of stick chairs.

He doesn't teach classes as much as he has in the past. That could be pandemic related. It could be related to the success of his publishing business and his ability to make decent money making chairs, chests and what ever else folks will give him money to make.

BTW, his evangelical fervor for SYP often makes me feel like taking my truck to the nearest place stocking it and picking up a load.

jtk

[Andrew Seemann]

The whole "Roubo" bench thing has always fascinated me, not the bench itself (I've never liked it), but how it ended up in mainstream woodworking, and how it is seems like it has become the current bench of choice. As far as I know, the first modern reference to the bench called "Roubo" is in the appendix of Frank Hubbard's 1965 book Three Centuries of Harpsichord Making. Frank was also a Medieval furniture enthusiast and had translated some of Roubo's works from the French. He added the bench as an example of available woodworking tech at the time, along with pictures and descriptions of period tools plus water and hand powered resawing.

Scott Landis gives a history and a plan for what he calls "The Roubo Bench" (even though Roubo has more than one bench in his books) in his 1987 book The Workbench Book. I seem to recall a connection between Hubbard and Landis's book but I can't find it now. This seems to be where it becomes more mainstream and in the woodworking public eye. The thing that has always amazed me is that it somehow got cast as the ideal hand tool bench, which is strange because Roubo himself in a later book also talks about these great new "German" benches with all their neat holding devices and how they are great for holding small stuff. The "Roubo" benches are shown in the illustration as being used for millwork and joiner's work. Basically it looks like they are making huge doors for French Chateaus, not the small case work, dovetailing, and sawing/chiseling that most modern hand tool workers do today.

Somehow from there it ends up as being "anarchic". Strange indeed.

[Scott Clausen]

As I get older I need to be able to move items without help as I have no partner in woodworking. A full 3/4" sheet of plywood terrifies me. This is what made me look at the Moravian style. I get the feeling that there are some fantastic but massive Roubo benches out there that their owners have builders remorse when it is time to downsize. My top slab is at the limit of what I can move and carry solo. Going back to the wood whisperer, I don't know if his Roubo was a bad fit for his work style or was more of a bad fit for his shop space. I have been listening to the podcasts and notice that you can now hear the garage door going up when Mark's wife gets home. That's a new sound which is also a loss of square footage.

[Edward Weber]

The whole "Roubo" bench thing has always fascinated me, not the bench itself (I've never liked it), but how it ended up in mainstream woodworking, and how it is seems like it has become the current bench of choice. As far as I know, the first modern reference to the bench called "Roubo" is in the appendix of Frank Hubbard's 1965 book Three Centuries of Harpsichord Making. Frank was also a Medieval furniture enthusiast and had translated some of Roubo's works from the French. He added the bench as an example of available woodworking tech at the time, along with pictures and descriptions of period tools plus water and hand powered resawing.

Scott Landis gives a history and a plan for what he calls "The Roubo Bench" (even though Roubo has more than one bench in his books) in his 1987 book The Workbench Book. I seem to recall a connection between Hubbard and Landis's book but I can't find it now. This seems to be where it becomes more mainstream and in the woodworking public eye. The thing that has always amazed me is that it somehow got cast as the ideal hand tool bench, which is strange because Roubo himself in a later book also talks about these great new "German" benches with all their neat holding devices and how they are great for holding small stuff. The "Roubo" benches are shown in the illustration as being used for millwork and joiner's work. Basically it looks like they are making huge doors for French Chateaus, not the small case work, dovetailing, and sawing/chiseling that most modern hand tool workers do today.

Somehow from there it ends up as being "anarchic". Strange indeed.


Thank you, now i know I'm not alone in my perspective on this bench.
I have no problem with the bench itself, if that's what people want but the whole anarchistic thing is silly IMO. Are you really and anarchist if you build the same thing everyone else does or promotes it?
The Roubo was "mainstream" in the 1600's, I don't know how or why people adopted it to current day woodworking. It's big, strong, stout and can hold up a car but do most people need that?. I agree with overbuilding things so you're not always testing the limits as you work but these may be going too far for some. Maybe, just maybe, the popularity is waning.
A good workbench is a project most only tackle about once every ten years, if that, this may also contribute to the lack of visibility of the newer style.

Personally I prefer a base that's stable on it's own and then a top can be added. Having legs integral to the top is not my design choice. Which is one of the reasons I don't care for them.

[Monte Milanuk]

Scott,

The Moravian style is another one on my 'short' list. Built a Nicholson (more of a Nichol-bo, dimensionally), found I really didn't like the aprons, at least not the way I implemented them, and since deconstructed it and have been reusing the lumber for other projects. I've never really had a bench with a tool well, so I'm not sure whether I'd love it or hate it. At this point... I'm almost considering making both, at some point, just 'because'. *After* I get about a dozen other projects taken care of first, so no idea when that might be!

[Scott Clausen]

Scott,

The Moravian style is another one on my 'short' list. Built a Nicholson (more of a Nichol-bo, dimensionally), found I really didn't like the aprons, at least not the way I implemented them, and since deconstructed it and have been reusing the lumber for other projects. I've never really had a bench with a tool well, so I'm not sure whether I'd love it or hate it. At this point... I'm almost considering making both, at some point, just 'because'. *After* I get about a dozen other projects taken care of first, so no idea when that might be!
A bench with a tool well, dem's fighting words. I like mine, yes it catches shavings and tools but I can dump it easy and that action alone causes me to put a few tools away but I have never had a bench without either. I did turn the underside into my clamp rack but that cancels out the portability advantage. I have a project where I am making a new double hung sash for a neighbor using hand tools and fantasize taking the bench up there to adjust the fit. I might need to get some Roy Underhill garments to make the show memorable. Ironically I have placed myself on his waiting list for the sash course.

[Jim Koepke]

the whole anarchistic thing is silly IMO.

My understanding, from actually reading the text, is Mr Schwarz sees himself as the "aesthetic anarchist."

He worked as an editor for a publisher. He wanted his own work bench. This didn't fit in with the company's idea of what an editor needed to do his job. He devised a plan to get his own bench by pitching the idea for an article on being able to build a bench for less than $200.

It sold magazines, he got a bench.

That is likely where the 'anarchy' designation originates. Though quitting his job, buying a run down building and starting a business or three is also a bit anarchistic in common society.

A well organized system is nice, but occasionally a little anarchy is helpful in getting things done.

jtk

[steven c newman]

Hmmm...someone seems to be trying to start an Anti-Schwarz Crusade? Unless they have mistaken Chris for Scott Phillips?


Yep, I think we got the memo....someone HATES Roubo style benches......about like a "Crusade" a few years back....one was started against all things Minwax....( turned out Minwax was hurting his sales of P&L 38...)

I built my bench to both fit the shop I work in, AND the style of projects I build.....with the features I wanted to have. Which is the way EVERY bench should be made...

BTW: those benches that Roubo shows....were made from a single thick slab of wood....a bit hard to do, nowadays, isn't it?

[mike stenson]

Eh, it's patently obvious that actually none of the books have actually been read. Which really makes comments about them, well, fundamentally hilarious. To be honest.

[Jim Koepke]

Eh, it's patently obvious that actually none of the books have actually been read. Which really makes comments about them, well, fundamentally hilarious. To be honest.

Like Steven said, it is may be more an anti-Schwarz feeling than a commentary on a book.

Like so many have said before, a workbench is merely a tool to support and hold ones work. It is only common sense for any individual planning on making a bench to make a bench customized for making their work easier for their style of working.

Wouldn't that be somewhat anarchistic in a world of identical factory built workbenches?

jtk

[mike stenson]

Like Steven said, it is may be more an anti-Schwarz feeling than a commentary on a book.

Like so many have said before, a workbench is merely a tool to support and hold ones work. It is only common sense for any individual planning on making a bench to make a bench customized for making their work easier for their style of working.

Wouldn't that be somewhat anarchistic in a world of identical factory built workbenches?

jtk

Indeed. Or factory made (and disposable) things, like furniture, in general.

[Andrew Pitonyak]

Personally I prefer a base that's stable on it's own and then a top can be added. Having legs integral to the top is not my design choice. Which is one of the reasons I don't care for them.

Someday someone will need to move it out of my basement.... They probably will not want to need a chain saw.... So I want it to come apart. Even then, it won't be easy. I bought my work bench based on what I could afford and if I could get the parts into the basement.

[Don Dorn]

Well, My name isn't Schwarz, I don't care for the Roubo design and I'm not a 16th century French woodworker, other than that, the bench is probably fine.

Schwarz has been banging on about his workbench rules for probably 15 years or so and never once has he asked anyone that i can tell, "what type of woodworking do you do ?". You know, so maybe you could build one for your own needs, crazy right.
Not everyone needs or wants a bench made from 6" or 8" timbers, no matter how much Schwarz gets excited about it.
A Roubo or clone is not the "perfect" bench, the perfect bench is different for everyone.

I just recently saw that the Wood Whisperer is auctioning his Roubo off because it doesn't fit his needs.

I suggest,
1. think about your own method of work and needs
2. size it to your own body and shop
3. base it on a style you like and can afford
You have to use it after all.
Sorry for the rant

It's not a rant - your opinion.

[chris carter]

For those concerned about being able to get their Roubo out of the basement when they move, it should be pointed out that you don’t have to glue the top to the legs. Lots of people just rely on gravity and it seems to work perfectly fine. If you don’t want to rely on gravity you can just dry pin the top to the legs which is also a common technique with Roubos. That way, when it comes time to get that heavy thing out of there you just drill out the pins. Either way you now have a separate top and separate undercarriage to move. There are also people called movers who can easily get a full Roubo out of a basement and into a truck – if they could get my 350lb solid steel office desk up and down a flight of stairs with a turn in them for me without too much effort, then they can move a Roubo.

As for me, I have a split-top roubo. It is not glued to the legs. Being a split-top there are a pair of top stretchers and the inside portions of the tops must be lagged (not too tight though) onto that. Remove the lags and the top comes off.

[Jim Koepke]

It is amazing how many ways there are to, in effect, place a rectangle of wood on top of legs.

People have been doing this for millennia yet we still debate the ways in which it should be done.

Just a thought before dinner.

jtk

[Andrew Seemann]

I should probably clarify, I've never liked the Roubo bench for the work I do. If I did a lot of thicknessing and edge jointing of larger boards I think the Roubo style bench would be absolutely awesome, no questions whatsoever. It would be the same with chopping large mortices.

Unfortunately, the good features of a Roubo style bench are lost on me: its length, mass, stops, and holdfasts. I only thickness and joint large boards by hand if no other option is available. I rarely chop large mortices by hand these days. In general, the scale of the work I use a hand tool bench for doesn't match the size of a Roubo style bench.

I am typically holding smaller sized boards for finish planing, chisel work, and the odd hand cut dovetails (and power tool work). For that work, I like a shoulder vise, tail vise, a row of dogs, and a more compact footprint. Not surprisingly, I use a Scandinavian style bench, as it does the things that I like well. If I need to face joint a board too wide for my jointer and too long for my Scandi bench, I can do that on my assembly bench in a pinch.

My thoughts on the Roubo style bench really don't have anything to do with Chris Schwarz, I was familiar with it long before I had ever heard of him. That said, I don't tend to follow his videos/books. For whatever reason, he really doesn't appeal to me. I've never really known why; he does seem to be knowledgeable and skilled. Whenever I try to watch his stuff though, I tend to click to something else after a few minutes. I typically read his articles if I come across them, but I don't seek them out.



Having been in this hobby for 40+ years (as both a hobbiest and semi-professional), I've seen things come and go, and the sociology of the hobby fascinates me more and more as the years go by. When I stared, mid century modern was still in style, dowel joints were common, danish oil was the go to finish, hand planes were more or less considered obsolete, and the big tool debate was whether to get a table saw or a radial arm saw (who had money or room for both back then?).
Then there was the rise (and fall) of Shopsmith, Arts and Crafts started to come back in style, cheap East Asian tools began to make the hobby more accessible, the New Yankee workshop debuted, and boutique manufactures like Lee Valley/Veratis and Lie Nielsen started. Hand tools came back into style as well as more and more older and non electrical methods of work. Don't get me wrong, there have always been hand tool woodworkers, but nothing like the hand tool subculture of today.
Then the big change, the Internet and finally YouTube. To be a famous woodworker in the old days you had to either teach generations of students (e.g. Tage Frid) write lots of articles (e.g. Frank Klausz, Garret Hack, Christian Becksvoort, and the rest of the FWW, PW, etc crews) or be on TV (e.g. Norm, Roy Underhill). The internet really opened up the flood of woodworker teacher/inspirors. Many were ones that had been in print that saw the potential of the new medium (e.g. Schwarz, Sellers, Cosman) and others started mostly online only like Marc Spagnuolo.
It does fascinate me how things go in and out of style, like different work benches, finishes, glues, tools, sharpening methods, the whole bevel up vs bevel down thing. I could to on and on, but it is getting to be late, so I will end with, what a long strange trip it's been:)

[Jim Koepke]

I should probably clarify, I've never liked the Roubo bench for the work I do. If I did a lot of thicknessing and edge jointing of larger boards I think the Roubo style bench would be absolutely awesome, no questions whatsoever. It would be the same with chopping large mortices.

Unfortunately, the good features of a Roubo style bench are lost on me: its length, mass, stops, and holdfasts. I only thickness and joint large boards by hand if no other option is available. I rarely chop large mortices by hand these days. In general, the scale of the work I use a hand tool bench for doesn't match the size of a Roubo style bench.

I am typically holding smaller sized boards for finish planing, chisel work, and the odd hand cut dovetails (and power tool work). For that work, I like a shoulder vise, tail vise, a row of dogs, and a more compact footprint. Not surprisingly, I use a Scandinavian style bench, as it does the things that I like well.
[edited]
:)

That is great Andrew. That is the first consideration of what one's bench should be, what does it need to do for you?

Somethings about the Roubo appeal to me, some do not.

At one time a wagon vise seemed like a great idea. After thinking about it a while it didn't seem to have the versatility of other vise styles. For some folks it is all they need in a vise.

The Scandi benches are great pieces of work that many people find to be the best answer for their needs.

Everyone is doing something different whether it is makeing cabinets or bamboo fishing rods we all have our own needs and style.

jtk

[Warren Mickley]

The bench pictured in roubo's plate 11 was just a typical 18th century workbench. At that time similar work benches were in use by the Dominy Family on Long Island. It is not very different from the many benches pictured in Diderot's work of the previous decade, and not so very different from the workbenches of Moxon and Felibien in the 17th century.

Andrew, you are not the first to suggest that Roubo's bench was typical of joiners only. However, Roubo pictures similar benches in the section on the ebeniste and the box maker and if the bench of furniture makers was remarkable different, he would have illustrated it in the section on furniture makers. Diderot shows workbenches in several different trades, including furniture making, that show this form. Here is one of many Roubo benches.

468514

I have had Hubbard's harpsichord book since 1983. It is a good book, well researched etc. However, the idea that he introduced 18th centuryworkbenches and resawing does not stand up. Mercer (1929) shows a bench and resawing from Diderot. See Goodman (1962) Hubbard (1968) et cetera.

[Cory Newman]

Interestingly enough, I built a Roubo a few years ago, and I'm pretty sure I didn't start reading anything of Chris's until afterwards.

I found benchcrafted hardware first and bought the plans from them with the hardware.

[Edward Weber]

Unfortunately, the good features of a Roubo style bench are lost on me: its length, mass, stops, and holdfasts. I only thickness and joint large boards by hand if no other option is available. I rarely chop large mortices by hand these days. In general, the scale of the work I use a hand tool bench for doesn't match the size of a Roubo style bench.

My thoughts on the Roubo style bench really don't have anything to do with Chris Schwarz, I was familiar with it long before I had ever heard of him. That said, I don't tend to follow his videos/books. For whatever reason, he really doesn't appeal to me. I've never really known why; he does seem to be knowledgeable and skilled. Whenever I try to watch his stuff though, I tend to click to something else after a few minutes. I typically read his articles if I come across them, but I don't seek them out.

It does fascinate me how things go in and out of style, like different work benches, finishes, glues, tools, sharpening methods, the whole bevel up vs bevel down thing. I could to on and on, but it is getting to be late, so I will end with, what a long strange trip it's been:)

Very well said and might I add the entire point I was trying to make, thank you.
Back to the OP's question, maybe the Roubos and similar have run their course and a new style will emerge to be the next wave of benches, things come and go.

[Daniel Culotta]

FWIW I built one, sort of. I was going to build a Roubo-ish bench to replace my less-stable bench around the time the book came out, so I downloaded and skimmed the book and then built a bench. It pretty much looks like the one in the book, although I'm sure my dimensions and details differ. I was going to use SYP anyway because it's plentiful and cheap around me, which is all I want for shop furniture. I did use a leg vise, planing stop, and holdfasts (and was planning to before the book), but didn't use any of the hardware recommended. I didn't add the seat or tool rack or anything either.

When I say Roubo-ish, I mean not a Nicholson or Moravian. Basically a heavy top joined to heavy legs, no knock-down features. I built that design because it seemed more straightforward than the others.

It's a good bench that does everything I need for my varied work. I will throw in the qualifiers that I don't understand the hand-wringing over benches or people who write about them. It's a big heavy table that you mercilessly beat on, with some added ways to hold things in various ways. There are lots of ways to design and approach it, and they'll probably all work. I certainly didn't put an aesthetic consideration into mine, and don't baby it in any way (as the appearance of the top already highlights). But if you do/want to, that's cool.

Per Scott's post, the most difficult part I found in the build was laminating the top, legs, etc. It was just a lot of pieces and clamping going on there, and it took awhile. Once that was done and cleaned up it was pretty easy - the mortises are pretty simple if you auger out most of the waste. As for flattening, once the jointer is throwing consistent shavings along the length of the bench I call it done. I've never had a situation where I thought "if only my bench was a couple thousandths flatter!", but maybe that's just the neanderthal in me...

[Edward Weber]

It's a good bench that does everything I need for my varied work. I will throw in the qualifiers that I don't understand the hand-wringing over benches or people who write about them. It's a big heavy table that you mercilessly beat on, with some added ways to hold things in various ways. There are lots of ways to design and approach it, and they'll probably all work. I certainly didn't put an aesthetic consideration into mine, and don't baby it in any way (as the appearance of the top already highlights). But if you do/want to, that's cool.



I couldn't agree more

[Scott Winners]

Per Scott's post, the most difficult part I found in the build was laminating the top, legs, etc. It was just a lot of pieces and clamping going on there, and it took awhile. Once that was done and cleaned up it was pretty easy - the mortises are pretty simple if you auger out most of the waste. As for flattening, once the jointer is throwing consistent shavings along the length of the bench I call it done. I've never had a situation where I thought "if only my bench was a couple thousandths flatter!", but maybe that's just the neanderthal in me...

Yup, laminating the top also tricky. I agree with Dan (and Chris Scwartz) in general a workbench should be a flat enough surface heavy enough to hold still and stable enough to not wobble, at a comfortable height for the user. Done. Mine could be flatter, but it is flat enough for the work I do. My next one will be heavier, but my current top is 24x48 inches and the whole shebang only comes in around 130 pounds. When I have room to go bigger it can't help but be heavier.

[Jack Dover]

The bench pictured in roubo's plate 11 was just a typical 18th century workbench. At that time similar work benches were in use by the Dominy Family on Long Island. It is not very different from the many benches pictured in Diderot's work of the previous decade, and not so very different from the workbenches of Moxon and Felibien in the 17th century.



It seems that "Roubo's" bench is as much Roubo's as "Moxon vises" are Moxon's.

[Jack Dover]

Yup, laminating the top also tricky. I agree with Dan (and Chris Schwartz) in general a workbench should be a flat enough surface heavy enough to hold still and stable enough to not wobble, at a comfortable height for the user. Done. Mine could be flatter, but it is flat enough for the work I do.

Amen to this.

First and foremost a workbench must be rigid. Weight is a byproduct of construction methods and materials available at that time. It would be more expensive to build a light torsion box in 18th century than just taking a slab that's rigid enough. They didn't have sheet goods, cheap fasteners and glues back then.

If we look at the late 19th century textbooks we can see that workbenches evolved towards being more light, easier to construct, having more functions, adjustability and so on. I personally see very little practical reason replicating 18th century, "French", "Roman" or any other ethnical workbench, unless you work at Williamsburg or something. Woodworking in general went a long way since 18h century, there's a whole bunch of designs that are more practical, cheaper, more accessible and overall better than this "Roubo" thing. No to mention how much more serviceable benches from modern materials are. Usually people asking how to build a "Roubo" bench show up a few months later asking questions on how to flatten it and how to keep it flat for more than a few weeks.

Idk, it seems there's a fair share of woodworkers that just like agonizing over a flawless top, dog holes spacing and angles, searching the most expensive hardware. By the looks of those benches it seems that the only work done is building the bench itself and photoshoots, often on the verge of woodworking p0rn. Mine is what it is: a workshop implement. It has dents, chisel marks, screw holes and screws, dye stains, words and numbers scribbled and so on. I just don't get this whole obsession. Like, how many of you looked at a Chippendale piece and told to himself "oh, I wonder, what his workbench was like?"

[Edward Weber]

Along with a couple of others here, I don't get the entire allure or obsession of benches. I can certainly appreciate the fine construction and detail put into some of them, which seem to be more art than utility, I just don't use mine in that way. I also don't understand why I'm not a allowed to disagree.
It's old, someone wrote a book about it, you have to like it, no. I don't.

Most of us work on our benches to get jobs done. Others seem to work on their benches as a job itself. There is a big difference between to two.

[mike stenson]

Funny.

That's the message of the book.

[Kevin Jenness]

Eh, it's patently obvious that actually none of the books have actually been read. Which really makes comments about them, well, fundamentally hilarious. To be honest.


I did read the Anarchist Workbench to the point where he recounted building a bench from a solid slab that twisted an inch as it continued to dry. That's a little too anarchistic for me.

Then I found a post of a really nice Scandinavian bench that the builder said took him 400 hours. Wow!

I can admire a 400 hour bench, but I would rather spend several hundred of those hours using a less costly one. I don't know if that is anarchy or penury.

[Jack Dover]

That's the message of the book.

Yet the author advocates his design over others for like 15 years. Funny indeed.

[Jim Koepke]

Yet the author advocates his design over others for like 15 years. Funny indeed.

A flat surface with legs holding it up?

What a radical thing to advocate…

Can you point to a page or paragraph in the Anarchist Workbench advocating Mr. Schwarz's design as the best or one and only design to be considered?

From Chapter IV:


Different workbench forms are broadly allied with different woodworking trades. An obvious example is how the shaving horse (which is a low, staked workbench) is used for all manner of green woodworking tasks, from rural chairmaking to making rakes, drags and hoes. And while I’m sure that it’s possible to build a Boulle-work cabinet on a shaving horse, it’s not an ideal place for it.

So as you choose the form of workbench you want to build or buy, consider the tradition your work falls into. This will help you narrow your choices and perhaps avoid building three wrong benches before you get it right.

I think there are five common traditional forms for Western workbenches.

It continues to illustrate the common forms with pros and cons of each.

He also states:


So, are you a green woodworker? A joiner? A traditional carpenter? A home DIYer? Or someone who aspires to work at the top of the furniture trade? Once you know that, picking a bench form (and eventually its vises) is more straightforward.

Then proceeds to cover the benches he has made over the years.

It appears to me he is doing all he can to help people determine what might be the best features for their own needs.

jtk

[James Pallas]

I love tools, work benches being one of them. My hobby is woodworking so i like the attributes of that type bench. A Roubo seems a bit like what you may find in the truck garage with a big machinist vise on one end. I have three benches right now. One kind of English style, a Noden adjust a bench, and a sort of Moravian that i finished last year. If you’re a work bench in my space you better be ready. On the English one in the garage sits a bench grinder, not permanent mind you but i needed to grind some metal lathe tools. On the Noden resides a mini lathe and a surface plate, I was building vise. On the Moravian is the remainders of a refrigerator defrost fan replacement. Last months were a decoy carving on one, a cane carving on another and a string trimmer carburetor on the garage one. If they aren’t up to the task they can’t live here. 😀
Jim

[steven c newman]

They are called WORK benches...because that is what they are there for.

Have no idea what "Style" mine is,,don't really care. As long as it does the work I need to do...that is all I ask of it. Will never win a Beauty Contest for best looking bench....not what it's job is, anyway...

[Edward Weber]

Eh, it's patently obvious that actually none of the books have actually been read. Which really makes comments about them, well, fundamentally hilarious. To be honest.

I have read his first workbench book about 12 years ago, didn't like it then, nothing has changed.
I have nothing personally against Mr. Schwarz, we just have a much different approach to woodworking and that's okay.
I'm not obligated to agree with him or like Roubo benches.

[Andrew Seemann]

Amen to this.

First and foremost a workbench must be rigid. Weight is a byproduct of construction methods and materials available at that time. It would be more expensive to build a light torsion box in 18th century than just taking a slab that's rigid enough. They didn't have sheet goods, cheap fasteners and glues back then.

If we look at the late 19th century textbooks we can see that workbenches evolved towards being more light, easier to construct, having more functions, adjustability and so on. I personally see very little practical reason replicating 18th century, "French", "Roman" or any other ethnical workbench, unless you work at Williamsburg or something. Woodworking in general went a long way since 18h century, there's a whole bunch of designs that are more practical, cheaper, more accessible and overall better than this "Roubo" thing. No to mention how much more serviceable benches from modern materials are. Usually people asking how to build a "Roubo" bench show up a few months later asking questions on how to flatten it and how to keep it flat for more than a few weeks.

Idk, it seems there's a fair share of woodworkers that just like agonizing over a flawless top, dog holes spacing and angles, searching the most expensive hardware. By the looks of those benches it seems that the only work done is building the bench itself and photoshoots, often on the verge of woodworking p0rn. Mine is what it is: a workshop implement. It has dents, chisel marks, screw holes and screws, dye stains, words and numbers scribbled and so on. I just don't get this whole obsession. Like, how many of you looked at a Chippendale piece and told to himself "oh, I wonder, what his workbench was like?"

The other thing to remember is that the climate of France is much more even compared to say, the Midwest of the United States. Designs that self destruct here often are just fine in England, Germany, France, the Mediterranean, etc. As far as using the bench, if you look at Frank Klausz's bench in his bench building articles, it is a flawless work of art; if you look at the bench he uses in his videos, it is beat to h#ll.

I do think some people do take the historical accuracy thing farther than it needs to be. The historical instrument building community tends to go down that route. If one guy is using hide glue, then the next one has to be using real boar bristle, then you have to use "shop inches" rather than a standard ruler, then someone says they never use sandpaper because it isn't historical and it affects the tone (it is and it doesn't), then the next one goes a step further and so forth. Does it really need to devolve to the point where the only way you can make an "historically informed" copy of a spinet or violin is to work completely by hand in an unheated, dirt floored workshop lit by a single tallow candle using tools you forged from iron from the local bog and wood you cut and dried and milled yourself (never mind that guild regulations would have prohibited this) all the while suffering from scoliosis, rickets, and malaria, just so you can be in their "mindset"?



I did read the Anarchist Workbench to the point where he recounted building a bench from a solid slab that twisted an inch as it continued to dry. That's a little too anarchistic for me.

Then I found a post of a really nice Scandinavian bench that the builder said took him 400 hours. Wow!

I can admire a 400 hour bench, but I would rather spend several hundred of those hours using a less costly one. I don't know if that is anarchy or penury.

I did a bench mostly from Tage Frid's FWW #4 plans. If I had much more than 20-30 hours into it, I'd be shocked. It definitely has chisel marks, gouges, and a couple router dings in it. The only reason the finish isn't beat up is I never got around to putting a finish on it:)

[Jim Koepke]

I do think some people do take the historical accuracy thing farther than it needs to be.

A surface supported above the ground by anywhere from three to eight legs is historically accurate enough for me. :D

jtk

[Warren Mickley]

When I looked at woodworking in 1970, it was obvious that 18th century craftsmen were head and shoulders above 20th century craftsman. That is why I started studying historic woodworking techniques. That study has paid great dividends.

[James Pallas]

When I looked at woodworking in 1970, it was obvious that 18th century craftsmen were head and shoulders above 20th century craftsman. That is why I started studying historic woodworking techniques. That study has paid great dividends.

Warren, You are right about this. In todays world a craftsman doesn’t have much worth in the commercial world. Most work is done by machine and computer programs. In todays world if a piece doesn’t pass QC inspection it’s just trashed. They won’t sell it as seconds because it would tarnish the reputation of the company. It’s cheaper just to make another than have someone repair it. There is a demand for a true craftsman with real knowledge of working wood to provide quality to a discerning customer being it new or repair. Those customers are becoming fewer and fewer as time goes on.
Jim

[Kevin Jenness]

Warren, You are right about this. In todays world a craftsman doesn’t have much worth in the commercial world. Most work is done by machine and computer programs. In todays world if a piece doesn’t pass QC inspection it’s just trashed. They won’t sell it as seconds because it would tarnish the reputation of the company. It’s cheaper just to make another than have someone repair it. There is a demand for a true craftsman with real knowledge of working wood to provide quality to a discerning customer being it new or repair. Those customers are becoming fewer and fewer as time goes on.
Jim

I don't know about that. The rich, like the poor, are always with us, and there will always be a market for the elite craftsman. That is certainly true in the world of architectural woodworking. I don't believe it is any more limited than it was in the 18th century. Ruhlmann's shop put out work at least as sophisticated as anything built previously, and there are many other examples today.

I would say that the general run of furniture factory operatives and carpenters are less skilled than back in the day largely due to the specialization that allows greater overall productivity, and there is far more disposable furniture made, but there is a great deal of excellent work being produced at the highest level. That is especially true of amateur work. The mid 20th century may have been the nadir for overall level of workmanship in woodworking, and the 18th century certainly left us with many admirable examples to emulate, but Edward Barnesley's work from that later era is nothing to sneeze at.

[Charles Guest]

Over the years, I've happily ignored everything that comes after the phrase "The Anarchist's..."

I'd suggest buying enough wood to build a Roubo workbench, then use half of it to make a really nice dog house. What you have left will make a perfectly fine workbench for furniture. Now, if you happen to be awarded a commission to replace all of the entry doors at the Palace of Versailles, then by all means build a fleet of Roubos.

[Edward Weber]

I do think some people do take the historical accuracy thing farther than it needs to be. The historical instrument building community tends to go down that route. If one guy is using hide glue, then the next one has to be using real boar bristle, then you have to use "shop inches" rather than a standard ruler, then someone says they never use sandpaper because it isn't historical and it affects the tone (it is and it doesn't), then the next one goes a step further and so forth. Does it really need to devolve to the point where the only way you can make an "historically informed" copy of a spinet or violin is to work completely by hand in an unheated, dirt floored workshop lit by a single tallow candle using tools you forged from iron from the local bog and wood you cut and dried and milled yourself (never mind that guild regulations would have prohibited this) all the while suffering from scoliosis, rickets, and malaria, just so you can be in their "mindset"?



They are only called the good old days due to bad memories

[chris carter]

I find it rather comical the passion with which some people absolutely despise Roubo workbenches (and also Schwarz – which is a little weird to despise someone who, whether you disagree with some/most/all of what he says, the guy is just sharing his opinion and has done an awful lot to get people interested in handtool woodworking). The Roubo is a very good bench design, regardless of what anyone says. So is the English joiner’s bench. So is a Scandinavian bench. So is a shaker bench. These are all very very very very good time-tested designs. Anyone who disagrees is ignoring the fact that a whole ton of dead people made their livings with these benches and an awful lot of them did much better work than the vast majority of us. And they did it not as a hobby, but under the gun with a customer and tight turnaround times having to work as fast as humanly possible while still maintaining quality.

I would also say that the Roubo is definitely NOT the bench flavor of the week right now. It has easily been eclipsed by the Moravian. Whenever someone posts about what kind of bench they should build there are always recommendations for the Moravian – and at least three times as many as the Roubo. If I had a dime for every time someone recommended a Moravian I would be able to buy all the wood to build a Moravian.

[steven c newman]

Almost starting to sound like one of "those" sharpening threads, doesn't it...?

[Matthew Hills]

I would also say that the Roubo is definitely NOT the bench flavor of the week right now. It has easily been eclipsed by the Moravian. Whenever someone posts about what kind of bench they should build there are always recommendations for the Moravian – and at least three times as many as the Roubo. If I had a dime for every time someone recommended a Moravian I would be able to buy all the wood to build a Moravian.

I'm thinking the Moravian's popularity is largely due to the music (https://youtu.be/9vKPpp5_bbE?t=44) that always plays during assembly.
(Chris did a light review (https://blog.lostartpress.com/2020/04/18/workbench-tour-no-8-moravian-workbench/) of it in his blog last year)

I'd think the english workbench would be the super popular format for people putting together a bench.

My bench is a roubo made from reclaimed doug fir. Having a flat, heavy, and fairly stiff surface is nice for handtools. The vises are jorgensen quick-release style, which are okay, but I can see why people go with other options, particularly for the front vise. I like having the dog holes, but these are primarily used with planing stops, rather than holdfasts or pinching the work between end vise and a bench dog.

Matt

[steven c newman]

Hmmm, watched a video from Rex Krueger last night.....where he reviewed all types of work benches....Might be fun to watch?

[mike stenson]

I have read his first workbench book about 12 years ago, didn't like it then, nothing has changed.
I have nothing personally against Mr. Schwarz, we just have a much different approach to woodworking and that's okay.
I'm not obligated to agree with him or like Roubo benches.
It is, but I will from here on simply take your opinion as uneducated in this context.

[Edward Weber]

I find it rather comical the passion with which some people absolutely despise Roubo workbenches (and also Schwarz – which is a little weird to despise someone who, whether you disagree with some/most/all of what he says, the guy is just sharing his opinion and has done an awful lot to get people interested in handtool woodworking). The Roubo is a very good bench design, regardless of what anyone says. So is the English joiner’s bench. So is a Scandinavian bench. So is a shaker bench. These are all very very very very good time-tested designs. Anyone who disagrees is ignoring the fact that a whole ton of dead people made their livings with these benches and an awful lot of them did much better work than the vast majority of us. And they did it not as a hobby, but under the gun with a customer and tight turnaround times having to work as fast as humanly possible while still maintaining quality.

I would also say that the Roubo is definitely NOT the bench flavor of the week right now. It has easily been eclipsed by the Moravian. Whenever someone posts about what kind of bench they should build there are always recommendations for the Moravian – and at least three times as many as the Roubo. If I had a dime for every time someone recommended a Moravian I would be able to buy all the wood to build a Moravian.


You find it comical that people feel passionate about their own opinion? You barely write a few sentences before you disregard everyone who disagrees with your opinion?
" The Roubo is a very good bench design, regardless of what anyone says."
I don't understand some people
Work safe

[Edward Weber]

It is, but I will from here on simply take your opinion as uneducated in this context.


Wow, you people do not tolerate anyone who thinks for themselves or has a contrary option.
I don't agree with you so I'm uneducated in this context?
Absolutely amazing

[Jim Koepke]

It is, but I will from here on simply take your opinion as uneducated in this context.


Wow, you people do not tolerate anyone who thinks for themselves or has a contrary option.
I don't agree with you so I'm uneducated in this context?
Absolutely amazing

Edward, You seem to miss one very important word, CONTEXT.

Your comments seem to imply there is only one bench in Chris Schwarz's first book:


I have read his first workbench book about 12 years ago, didn't like it then, nothing has changed.

You had noted your error earlier but you seem to have returned to the same point. Reminder: The book is not about one style of bench. The "anarchist" designation may come from his employment at the time not having a bench included in his job description. He came up with a way 'outside of the box' to build and then have his own workbench.

It may also be related to the idea that a workbench had to be made of maple or some other hardwood at a cost three or four times what it cost to build his first bench.

Is there a problem with his refining this design over the years?

Is there something wrong with the numerous bench styles Mr. Schwarz's built and included in his book?

Do you feel he shouldn't pursue the building of benches for pleasure, education, personal use or income? That's what he does. People have paid to attend his classes and build their own benches. People have paid to attend his classes on building a tool chest. Mr. Schwarz has made good money teaching about, writing about and making benches, chest and chairs. He also makes a good income from selling many of these items.

There are likely many of us who wish we were as good at making money doing something we enjoy.


So, if at the end of the day, if he would agree with my design principles, I'll go my own way.

Can you share your design principles with the rest of us? How do you know he doesn't agree with your design principles?

How about showing us what you make and how your bench design fulfills your specific needs.

There are often discussions of bench design here. Many feel it is an important part of their hobby, craft or profession of woodworking.

It is beneficial to know the advantages and drawbacks of various bench designs.

One person's drawback can be another's advantage, just like a bench's advantage for one can be a drawback to others.

jtk

[Edward Weber]

This entire thread has gone astray.
I answered the OP's question and made a sarcastic comment about the designer of the bench in question.
MEANING, if Mr Schrawz hasn't found the "perfect" bench in all the years he's been doing this, what chance does anyone else have. Sarcasm, get it.
I read his first book, as I said I didn't care for it. It could be his style of writing or the fact that there was nothing about workbenches that I found particularly useful. I have read many articles and columns by Mr.Schwarz over the years and as I said, we just seem to have a different perspective on thing, that's all.
I also never said that there was anything wrong with the Roubo bench. I said I didn't like it and it's not for everyone. I also implied that some who've built them are now having second thoughts.
NONE of this is controversial, just one mans opinion.
Many on this forum seem to think that's not allowed and now you want me to prove or somehow validate my option by elaborating on my design process and or philosophy, seriously?
I already said that I do not care for benches where the top is integrated into the legs. This alone eliminates a Roubo style bench from my consideration.
If you really must know, my preferred design is along the lines of a bench found in FWW Tools & Shops back in the winter of 2003/2004 But since it's not a Roubo, all of those guys are to be considered uneducated and we'll just dismiss their opinion shall we.

[Mel Fulks]

Maybe someone will do a book on “Route 66”TV benches . Will probably be mostly modifications of road side picnic tables that can be made
and used before the angry residents decide you murdered one of the fine locals.

[Jim Koepke]

Many on this forum seem to think that's not allowed and now you want me to prove or somehow validate my option by elaborating on my design process and or philosophy, seriously?

To the best of my knowledge no one has called for censoring your posts.

My request was for you to share your design philosophy.

My request was not for you to validate your opinion or choice but to see what you find to work for your woodworking. It would be simple to take a picture, post it and tell the readers of this thread why this works for you.
This is not meant to insult you or create any difficulty for you.

Not having a copy of FWW Tools & Shops from the winter of 2003/2004, or knowing what became of it if one was ever in my possession, my knowledge of your bench design will only be by your posting an image or two. It might be something others will want to adopt.


But since it's not a Roubo, all of those guys are to be considered uneducated and we'll just dismiss their opinion shall we.

My memory may be failing me, but there doesn't seem to be anyone other than yourself claiming this opinion is rampant.

BTW, sarcasm seldom comes through clearly in text. One of my many weaknesses is to accept people at their word, unless they have shown themselves unworthy of such.

jtk

[Edward Weber]

You seem to be trying to be the voice of reason.
For starters, I never used the word "rampant", so putting words in my mouth isn't really helping anything. And if you didn't "get" the sarcasm from my first post, I don't know what to tell you.

I am not taking a photo of my bench so that you and others, that have already dismissed my opinion as uneducated, uninformed or whatever, can critique it. I have a sneaky feeling no matter what I were to post there would be no difference in opinion, how ironic.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwjZg5v8ibz0AhUpHDQIHc2LCk0QFnoECAcQAQ&url=https%3A%2F%2Ffinewoodworking.com%2Fprojectpla ns%2F011167038.pdf&usg=AOvVaw3jsG6F8D0_Img73dRDxxN3

Have a nice day

[Kevin Jenness]

Have a nice day

I sense sarcasm.

[David Publicover]

I sense sarcasm.
Me too.
Ironically, my last bench was very similar in design to the FWW model featured in the link. Mine wasn’t as nicely made as it featured a laminated mdf and tempered hardboard top but I used it for over 20 years. My new bench is roubo influenced and I drew a lot of ideas and dimensions from The Anarchist Workbench. It was a fun project and it’s a good bench too. At the end of the day, they are just woodworking benches…

[Mel Fulks]

My bench is a nailed and screwed together bunch of 2 by 4 lumber . It looks like a short bridge. The top is nice, 3 and 3/8ths thick beech.
The pieces are about 1 and 3/8ths . Has a nice old Emmert vise.

[Kevin Jenness]

Mel, I've always admired those patternmaker's vises on paper. Is yours easy to use in all its versatile glory?

[Mel Fulks]

Oh yeah! ,Kevin. Mine is an Emmert , It opens at least a foot ,and jaw length is ,I think 16” . Some of them have 18” length. Got it by sheer
luck. Guy I was working for bought bunch of shop stuff in a lot, and several vises were included. The swivel jaws are nice for holding non
square stuff. He had no knowledge of the vises and had paid no attention to them. Think it was about $125, that was about 20 years ago.
The swivel jaws come 2 ways ,moved by a lever, and moved by turning a knob. Mine has the knob , the levers often won’t stay where you
want . But doubtless some on this forum would know the fix.

[Scott Winners]

If I someday have a shop with much better climate control I will reconsider fastening a top to an undercarriage with lag bolts. Local I often see 8-10% RH in the winter and 70-80% RH summer. The wood in my bench does move with the seasons, even inside my garage. YMMV.

[James Pallas]

Hardly seems like it now but 20 years ago I built a bench that by today you could call a a Roubo. 8’ long 2’ deep laminated 2x 6 dou fir top. Tail vise with 1 1/2 metal screw that I had built up for it. 6 x 6 legs morticed into the top, not through the top and no dovetails. It was a good bench and I didn’t know what a Roubo was at the time. When I moved I left it with a friend that wanted it. I missed it most because of the tail vise. I just built another bench more like a Moravian but added a tail vise. Would i build another like the old one, no, too heavy for the work I do. Did I need it then, no, same reason. The tail vise is what i missed. Got that now so I’m happy.
Jim

[Jim Koepke]

You seem to be trying to be the voice of reason.
For starters, I never used the word "rampant", so putting words in my mouth isn't really helping anything. And if you didn't "get" the sarcasm from my first post, I don't know what to tell you.

I am not taking a photo of my bench so that you and others, that have already dismissed my opinion as uneducated, uninformed or whatever, can critique it. I have a sneaky feeling no matter what I were to post there would be no difference in opinion, how ironic.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwjZg5v8ibz0AhUpHDQIHc2LCk0QFnoECAcQAQ&url=https%3A%2F%2Ffinewoodworking.com%2Fprojectpla ns%2F011167038.pdf&usg=AOvVaw3jsG6F8D0_Img73dRDxxN3

Have a nice day

Thanks for the link. There is no reasonable voice to dismiss the design of the FWW bench. After all it is a flat surface with work holding devices supported by legs.

Is there anything untoward about being a voice of reason?

No, you did not use the word rampant.


rampant | ˈrampənt |
adjective
1 (especially of something unwelcome or unpleasant) flourishing or spreading unchecked

It did seem you felt as if you were being persecuted by others for your opinions. (something unwelcome or unpleasant) To me it seemed you were sensing it from all directions. (flourishing or spreading) Rampant seemed like a fitting word. My faux pas.

Maybe it was the unrecognized sarcasm that brought others like myself to try and explain how the contents of a book didn't appear to be what you were saying they were.

As stated earlier sarcasm in text is all too easily misunderstood without knowing the person posting the sarcasm or having emojis attached to indicate it is sarcasm. :eek:

In work training situations one of my biggest headaches was caused by someone being sarcastic about how to adjust a mechanism. It caused years of fixing what someone thought they were doing right because of another person's sarcastic remark. It wasn't possible to get them to believe they were doing it incorrectly after they heard so and so tell them "the right way of doing it."

jtk

[Kevin Jenness]

Sarcasm has its place but it is a blunt instrument. Why neglect dramatic irony, metaphor, bathos, puns, parody, litotes and satire? If all else fails, one can fall back on straight up mockery.

[steven c newman]

Ah yes...another one of those "MY way or the Highway" sort of thing.....Looking a bit lonely out there on the old country gravel road....

" Lighten up...Francis"

[Monte Milanuk]

Man, I need some popcorn to go with this thread ;)

FWIW, I'm normally pretty good at reading context / sarcasm. Not perfect, but usually pretty good.

Most of what Ed posted didn't come across as sarcasm. Mostly it just seemed dismissive and crotchety. That's his opinion, and his prerogative, but it didn't really surprise me when others responded in kind. And then things started circling the drain from there...

I think Steve said it best... "lighten up"

[Jim Koepke]

I think Steve said it best... "lighten up"

Agree

jtk

[Jake Hillestad]

Ah yes...another one of those "MY way or the Highway" sort of thing....

" Lighten up...Francis"

Thats rich considering the source.

[steven c newman]

Thats rich considering the source.



LOLOLOLOLOL :D:D:D

And..maybe a photo of Jake's bench? Hmmm....:confused:

[Jake Hillestad]

Still working my way up to something on par with bandits dungeon bench...

https://i.postimg.cc/87NH9RxZ/IMG-0118.jpg (https://postimg.cc/87NH9RxZ)

[steven c newman]

Welll...that IS what I used to build the current WORK bench ....over 7 years ago....except mine had a glass top. Kept all the tools I was using on the table......actual work table was a 2 x 12 finger clamped to the3rd step on a 6' Werner Step Ladder, although...I did have a saw bench out there, too..that I had made a couple weeks before.

Maybe try that stepladder trick? :rolleyes: You can clamp a 2 x12 to the step(s) at whatever height you like. THEN you can clamp the work to that plank. If you are working outside, wear a hat...a sun-burnt bald head tends to hurt....oh, and sunscreen....?;)

PS...BTW, those sort of tables work best with all 4 legs on the patio....just a heads up...:D

[Andrew Seemann]

Still working my way up to something on par with bandits dungeon bench...

https://i.postimg.cc/87NH9RxZ/IMG-0118.jpg (https://postimg.cc/87NH9RxZ)

I'd be lying if I said I hadn't used similar or worse in a pinch:). Ya make do with what you have to work with.

[Holmes Anderson]

I'm surprised this thread doesn't include more opinion on the hybrid workbench that Marc Spagnuolo built to replace his Roubo. The electrical outlet on the front face of the left front leg of Spagnuolo's bench is inexplicable because that is the leg that is used most for clamping and there are plenty of other locations for an electrical outlet. I also don't understand why he mounted the face vise fully to the right side of the left front leg. The face vise should be mounted to the left of, or straddling, the left front leg (for a right handed woodworker) with a jaw liner that extends to the left edge of the bench and across the top of the left front leg. However, he did some clever things with the insert for the split top. Maybe Spagnuolo is the real workbench anarchist.

[chris carter]

You find it comical that people feel passionate about their own opinion? You barely write a few sentences before you disregard everyone who disagrees with your opinion?
" The Roubo is a very good bench design, regardless of what anyone says."
I don't understand some people
Work safe

I did not find it comical that people have their own opinions. It’s just that the utter vehemence with which such negative opinions against a bench style and a particular person, with an aura of universal truth, by more than one individual – particularly when there were some contradictory and factually inaccurate statements – was to me, rather comical. Surely you aren’t criticizing the passion with which I find it comical, or disregarding it because you disagree with it. Because that would be ironic as heck. (<= SARCASM). The snarkiness of your last two lines, directed specifically at me, I think underscores my point.

Additionally, your very selective quote of me in your third line is taken ENTIRELY out of context because the entirety of my post clearly demonstrated that I am not disregarding people's personal bench preferences but rather, I was highlighting personal preferences, even amongst professionals, have always existed across a lot of different, and very good, bench designs.

[Jim Koepke]

I'm surprised this thread doesn't include more opinion on the hybrid workbench that Marc Spagnuolo built to replace his Roubo. The electrical outlet on the front face of the left front leg of Spagnuolo's bench is inexplicable because that is the leg that is used most for clamping and there are plenty of other locations for an electrical outlet. I also don't understand why he mounted the face vise fully to the right side of the left front leg. The face vise should be mounted to the left of, or straddling, the left front leg (for a right handed woodworker) with a jaw liner that extends to the left edge of the bench and across the top of the left front leg. However, he did some clever things with the insert for the split top. Maybe Spagnuolo is the real workbench anarchist.

You may have answered your own curiosity, Marc Spagnuolo may be left handed.

BTW, well said Chris.

jtk

[Edward Weber]

"Well, My name isn't Schwarz, I don't care for the Roubo design and I'm not a 16th century French woodworker, other than that, the bench is probably fine."

So I'm crotchety, uneducated and so on because some of you didn't understand sarcasm? Or is it that I have my own opinion that you disagree with? Or is it that I don't agree with everything Mr. Schwarz writes? Or maybe it's something else.
The Illusory superiority from some members is quite scary. Everyone has their own opinion but sharing them is becoming more and more difficult due to the harsh reception you receive when you differ from the flock. Why would anyone want to share information and ideas when you get such hostility in return?
I can only guess but there may be others that share a similar opinion to mine but don't need the grief that comes with expressing it, so they stay quiet instead.
To sum it all up.
I don't like the Roubo design
I gave a perfectly valid reason for my opinion
I provided a like to a design I prefer
This is what gets everyone so upset?

I stand by the above quote

[mike stenson]

Mostly it's your attitude.

[Jim Koepke]

"Well, My name isn't Schwarz, I don't care for the Roubo design and I'm not a 16th century French woodworker, other than that, the bench is probably fine."

So I'm crotchety, uneducated and so on because some of you didn't understand sarcasm? Or is it that I have my own opinion that you disagree with? Or is it that I don't agree with everything Mr. Schwarz writes? Or maybe it's something else.
The Illusory superiority from some members is quite scary. Everyone has their own opinion but sharing them is becoming more and more difficult due to the harsh reception you receive when you differ from the flock. Why would anyone want to share information and ideas when you get such hostility in return?
I can only guess but there may be others that share a similar opinion to mine but don't need the grief that comes with expressing it, so they stay quiet instead.
To sum it all up.
I don't like the Roubo design
I gave a perfectly valid reason for my opinion
I provided a like to a design I prefer
This is what gets everyone so upset?

I stand by the above quote


Mostly it's your attitude.

Have to agree with Mike. The first reply to your first post in this thread:


Have you read any of his books on workbenches? Throughout every one, he talks about finding the style of bench that works for you and I doubt that he would argue with any of your three design principals.

Later you replied:


So, if at the end of the day, if he would agree with my design principles, I'll go my own way.

With others posting evidence of Mr. Schwarz agreeing even advocating people finding what works best for their own needs. You seemed to accept you may have been barking up the wrong tree.

You seemed to take offense at Mr. Schwarz making a living out of his continuous making of benches and tool chests.

You also wrote:
I also don't understand why I'm not a allowed to disagree.

Could you refresh my memory as to who said you were not allowed to disagree?

Some corrected you on your misunderstaning.

BTW, the book in question was published in 2020:

468998

There is a good chance it is quite different than the copy you read a dozen years ago.

Thinking back, if it came to my attention your posts were all sarcasm it could have saved a lot of time.

jtk

[Eric Rathhaus]

James - I think the opposite is true. craftsman are expensive and machines are cheaper all the time. The problem isn't the makers as much as it is the buyers. Most buyers want cheap and to buy often, which is the opposite of artisan-based market. Climate change is affecting our societal tastes and starting a revival of the artisan market.

[Edward Weber]

This is just tiring, so I will attempt to make this the last post on this topic.
My original comments were sarcastic in response to the OP's question.

Next I was asked if I ever read any of his books, which I had but apparently not the one most were referencing. I mentioned that I didn't care for the book, though no one asked why. I did not like the book I read, mainly because it offered me nothing new that I hadn't already considered at the time.
I used an example of a popular woodworker as someone who was auctioning off their Roubo style bench for something different, again I was accused of misunderstanding what I saw or heard.

I then again tried to point out my position/opinion
"As I was attempting to point out, these benches are simply not for everyone. My example of the Wood Whispers is just that, an example of someone who built a large Roubo and later realized it was not a good fit for what he does. I can only guess there are others who have come to the same realization.
Mr. Schwarz, regardless of your opinion, has been chasing his perfect bench for 20+ years and may not have found it yet. Most woodworkers don't have the luxury of building a new bench every couple of years or when he updates his design. Maybe that's why we don't see many of the new ones.
So, if at the end of the day, if he would agree with my design principles, I'll go my own way."

We can not all do as Mr Schwarz does in regard to benches or toolchests he introduces every so often, that is after all his job. We all don't have that luxury, I actually envy him in this regard.

If we are in agreement on the "basics" of bench design, why would I need to read about it in a book? I will go my own way. yeah, that's controversial.

The comment that got everyone so upset
"Schwarz has been banging on about his workbench rules for probably 15 years or so and never once has he asked anyone that i can tell, "what type of woodworking do you do ?". You know, so maybe you could build one for your own needs, crazy right."

Since I didn't care for the book I read (apparently the incorrect one), I did not commit every word to memory, my shortcoming I guess.

This ties in directly with the above comments about him introducing a different bench or toolchest every so often. It's his job, of course he has introduced bench after bench over the years. Again, a touch of sarcasm.
I was also quickly corrected about my "what type of woodworking do you do ?" comment, to which I acknowledged my error and said thank you.

Then I got a lecture on my comment on saying I think the anarchist thing is silly.
Once again my opinion, Being a 21st century woodworker who primarily uses hand tool stored in a centuries old designed toolbox, is not what I would call an anarchist, obviously others disagree.

While I could go on point by point, I see no reason. I have already explained myself well beyond what is reasonable. As you can see, everything I wrote has been met with some sort of disapproval for one reason or another. When I was factually wrong, I owned up to it immediately, the rest is simply a difference of opinion and I'll leave it at that.

[Thomas Wilson]

Sarcasm has its place but it is a blunt instrument. Why neglect dramatic irony, metaphor, bathos, puns, parody, litotes and satire? If all else fails, one can fall back on straight up mockery.

Kevin,

I had to look up two words in a 33 word post. Excellent!

TW

[Jim Koepke]

Kevin,

I had to look up two words in a 33 word post. Excellent!

TW

I thank my 10th grade English teacher (thank you Miss Rawlins) for causing me to look them up over half a century ago.

jtk

[Luke Dupont]

Wow. This thread reminds me of the "this style vs that style" arguments on Martial Arts forums.

The best advise to give in those arguments is to "just train" and let experience teach you what works in what context, and why. Stay open minded, explore, learn, practice, and you'll all be far better off for it rather than for arguing about things.

The same advise can be given to woodworkers too, I think: just get on with making stuff. Try out a bunch of things. Some things will work for you better than for someone else, perhaps because they suit you and your needs better, perhaps because you simply haven't put in the time to learn and explore other methodologies. There's nothing wrong with sticking to what works for you and advocating it, but neither is there anything wrong with people who explore many different methods on an endless search for something that they may or may not ever find. You can learn from pretty much everyone and every methodology, even if you don't see fit to emulate them.

There's also nothing wrong with pursuing "the best", but there's also nothing wrong with sticking to "good enough and works for me."

There are diminishing returns with everything, but different people have different standards and demands, so good enough for one person may not be good enough for another. This is also totally fine.

[Jim Koepke]

There's also nothing wrong with pursuing "the best", but there's also nothing wrong with sticking to "good enough and works for me."

Having a bench that is "good enough and works for me" has done quite a lot to keep me from rushing through a bench build. It has also given me opportunities to see what works for me and changes to accommodate.

jtk

[Thomas Wilson]

I thank my 10th grade English teacher (thank you Miss Rawlins) for causing me to look them up over half a century ago.

jtk

Congratulations to Miss Rawlings for effective teaching and to your neurons for the long lasting memory. I may have been offered the same knowledge in Mrs. McMullins’ English class in 10th grade but I may have been thinking instead of Janicewhomighthavebeenwearingaminiskirtthatday in the adjacent classroom for 23 seconds out of every 30.

[Phil Gaudio]

Overwhelmed with the choices of bench designs, I did the only reasonable thing: I punted, and simply copied the Lie Nielsen bench: no regrets.
https://i.postimg.cc/3r90P44w/IMG-3022-zps97252e83.jpg (https://postimages.org/)

[mike stenson]

I currently have a Scandinavian style bench with a face vise. I made it about 15 years ago. I'll be making a new one this next year. It'll be a whole lot simpler, and longer. I've found that the vise racks, and is a pain, I don't use the end vise, I made it a couple feet too short, I don't like storage in the base (easy enough to get rid of though), and the legs would be a lot better off being coplanar with the edge. I also found that I end up using holdfasts and stops more than anything else. So, I'll have a flat top with lots of round holes for holdfasts, a planing stop, and one leg vise. Why? Because I have found that this is what I tend to actually use anyway. It also means I won't bother with making square dog holes again, so that simplifies making the top a lot.

The style, whether Roubo, Moravaian, Shaker, or English really doesn't matter too much to me. Although, since I won't move the thing again, so having a break-down bench really isn't interesting for me. Since I am a mostly 'beer powered' woodworker, and so I dimension most of my stock and mortise by hand, I need the top to be solid and stay there. Since I tend to clamp things to the bench, I doubt I'd go with the English (I wasn't a fan of the big apron on the last one I used) and since I don't like storage in the bench, no Shaker for me either. It's not my first bench. It won't be my last bench, that I'm sure of. At least, I hope I continue building things long enough to become annoyed with working on the next bench.

The existing bench will continue to live on, and serve, in my shop.. as an auxiliary bench. Something wonderful about de-emphasizing my power tools has been opening up floor space for more useful working surfaces. Maybe in a year or two I'll just be left with a planar, mini-lathe and a bandsaw, which sounds about right to me. Some of this reminds me of wheel sizes in mountain biking ;)

[Charles Guest]

Some truths in no particular order:



People pick and choose the Roubo plates that fit their philosophy and worldview, and attempt to rationalize away the other plates that don't; rather than focus on the so-called "German" bench (harder to build) the focus was on the joinery benches which Schwarz saw could fairly easily be made from glued up pine. Substitute 2x6s for 2x4s and you pretty much can't help but come up with a "Roubo." And the original article by Bob Tarule in Fine Woodworking was frankly better, thought it didn't really offer a strategy using construction pine. It was essentially a close reproduction, except perhaps for length. Most people aren't building 14' tall palace doors for the King of France. Some people have managed to ban German and Scandinavian woodworking from the Western canon. Kind of stupid to me. That said, Frid and Klausz covered Scandinavian style benches about as well as they could be covered, leaving Schwarz little room for the schtick and spin he tends to put on things.
Schwarz knows that people have a fixation on shop furniture and fixtures. They're a damn sight easier to make than a reproduction Georgian fully veneered barred glass door secretary, or something out of a Chippendale, Sheraton, or Hepplewhite design book; there's always a 'better' bench, toolchest, shooting board, etc. waiting to be made. Rinse and repeat. That'll be $34.99 thank-you-very-much. This all must be really amusing to the people at Taunton Press, who produced better books and articles on workbenchs and tool chests years and years ago. Perhaps imitation is in fact the sincerest form of flattery.
After realizing the truth behind #2, the rest is easy: just publish books and articles about old designs, from old books, and build a little story and narrative around them. The only thing (possibly) original is the little story. The rest could be had with a $100 investment in old books from Amazon, most of which have copyrights that expired long ago.
If you could transport yourself back in time, and walk out into the French countryside and cut down an old oak [or whatever], and take the center slab out of it for a workbench top then why the heck wouldn't you? Can't do the forestry work yourself? Just order it from your supplier. Cost of doing business, and after all it was big business.

[Warren Mickley]

Some truths in no particular order:



People pick and choose the Roubo plates that fit their philosophy and worldview, and attempt to rationalize away the other plates that don't; rather than focus on the so-called "German" bench (harder to build) the focus was on the joinery benches which Schwarz saw could fairly easily be made from glued up pine. Substitute 2x6s for 2x4s and you pretty much can't help but come up with a "Roubo." And the original article by Bob Tarule in Fine Woodworking was frankly better, thought it didn't really offer a strategy using construction pine. It was essentially a close reproduction, except perhaps for length. Most people aren't building 14' tall palace doors for the King of France. Some people have managed to ban German and Scandinavian woodworking from the Western canon. Kind of stupid to me. That said, Frid and Klausz covered Scandinavian style benches about as well as they could be covered, leaving Schwarz little room for the schtick and spin he tends to put on things.



If had you wanted to show off your Roubo knowledge you did a poor job. Of twenty five benches illustrated, only one has a tail vise.

[mike stenson]

All opinions too.

[Monte Milanuk]

...that people have a fixation on shop furniture and fixtures. They're a damn sight easier to make than a reproduction Georgian fully veneered barred glass door secretary, or something out of a Chippendale, Sheraton, or Hepplewhite design book; there's always a 'better' bench, toolchest, shooting board, etc. waiting to be made.

I wish I could say you're wrong, but I'd be lying :rolleyes::D



The style, whether Roubo, Moravaian, Shaker, or English really doesn't matter too much to me. Although, since I won't move the thing again, so having a break-down bench really isn't interesting for me. Since I am a mostly 'beer powered' woodworker, and so I dimension most of my stock and mortise by hand, I need the top to be solid and stay there. Since I tend to clamp things to the bench, I doubt I'd go with the English (I wasn't a fan of the big apron on the last one I used) and since I don't like storage in the bench, no Shaker for me either. It's not my first bench. It won't be my last bench, that I'm sure of. At least, I hope I continue building things long enough to become annoyed with working on the next bench.

The above touches on a few points that resonate with me. My first few benches were basic general purpose / 'utility' designs - more just flat surfaces to work / pound on, with little or no provision for workholding. My first 'woodworking' bench was a modified version of the knockdown Nicholson. Lots of firsts on that one... and lots of mistakes. The coup de grace was workholding... turned out I wanted to hold stuff 'down' a lot more than I wanted to hold it on edge, so the apron got in the way more often than not. So those utility benches are still around the shop, whereas the Nicholson got deconstructed and the parts re-used for other stuff. Part of me wonders if I'd be more inclined towards making it work if the construction process hadn't gone as sideways as it did.

The Moravian style has a bit of appeal (it's hard to read Ken Hatch's posts without getting inspired/infected just a little by his enthusiasm for the design!) but something about the leg joinery bothers me. Three different joints to do the same dang thing, for no apparent purpose other than practice or to show off. Not saying it doesn't work, or that I'd deviate from the traditional/original design if I built one, but it does bug me a bit. Whether it bugs me enough to *not* build one... can't say yet.

Going forward... the next project or two will probably be done at one of those utility benches, or (horrors!) using the trusty B&D WorkMate ;) while I work on accumulating some wood for the next bench. There's a strong chance that it'll be some sort of 'Roubo' style bench, whether 'Anarchist' variant or otherwise. Then some more projects. Then maybe another bench... :D

[Charles Guest]

If had you wanted to show off your Roubo knowledge you did a poor job. Of twenty five benches illustrated, only one has a tail vise.


Yep, the only one worth having... :p

[Thomas Wilson]

Yep, the only one worth having... :p
If I didn’t have a tail vise, where would I clamp my pencil sharpener.

[Charles Guest]

If I didn’t have a tail vise, where would I clamp my pencil sharpener.

Under a holdfast of course....

[Jim Koepke]

If I didn’t have a tail vise, where would I clamp my pencil sharpener.

You mean you don't just chuck a pencil up in your cordless drill and hold the sharpener in your hand?

jtk

-please don't try this at home.

jtk

[Thomas Wilson]

You mean you don't just chuck a pencil up in your cordless drill and hold the sharpener in your hand?

jtk

-please don't try this at home.

jtk
Well, I will now.

[James Pallas]

I had no idea there are such strong feelings about workbenches. My feelings are you build to what you primarily do. I’ve seen all of the things about building a bench then building another joinery bench, then a planning beam, than a bench on bench, than a carving bench so on and so forth. It’s like the Ford and Chevy thing with many more brands involved. Great fun though.
Jim

[Jim Koepke]

I had no idea there are such strong feelings about workbenches.

Like someone said, this is likely as much of a Pain in the Backside for moderators as a sharpening thread or a dovetail saw thread.

jtk

[Russell Nugent]

Woodturning is the only other hobby I've ever been involved in where I've found so much of the "if you don't do it my way you're doing it wrong" attitude.

[Andrew Seemann]

Get instrument makers talking about glue:) It descends into "I'm right anyone who disagrees is wrong and is an uneducated hack" in about 10 minutes.

[steven c newman]

On SMC...it usually is another sharpening thread....:eek:

[Tom Giles]

I built my temporary workbench out of a sheet of 3/4 ply, some 2x4s and an old craftsman wood vice I got in a yard sale for $5. I decided I’d use that temp bench until it didn’t support my needs. That was 40 years and a house full of furniture ago. About time to call it my permanent bench I suppose.

[Charles Guest]

Everybody loves the Shakers it seems, and Shaker style. There may be an exception or two, but it seems like every extant Shaker workbench in a Shaker museum has a tail vise, which they apparently found helpful even given the stripped down style they produced -- no carving, no veneer, no moldings or only very abbreviated ones (relatively speaking). Work holding is work holding. You have to have it and it is either integral to the bench or has to be accomplished in other ways.

[James Pallas]

It seems to me that there are only two arguments here. Weight and to have or have not a tail vise. I’ve seen a lot of workbenches here called Roubo or Roubo inspired that have about as much similarity as a canoe to a hydroplane. Your bench is inspired by you. I have been inspired by all of the ideas I see here. Some I have used some I don’t like. Nothing wrong with a 500# behemoth with a tail vise a shoulder vise and a one of those do everything vises on the back or just a slab of oak on saw horses. Build for you not us. You will be much happier than constantly being distressed by that shoulder vise you never use.
Jim

[Jim Koepke]

There may be an exception or two, but it seems like every extant Shaker workbench in a Shaker museum has a tail vise,

Charles, the discussion of tail vises sounds like a subject for a thread in itself.

Currently my tail vise is used more than my face vise. (though it is unpleasant to have either my tail or my face in a vise. :eek: :D )

At one time a wagon vise seemed like a great idea. Then after realizing it wouldn't be able to do many of the things my current tail vise is capable of doing the idea of incorporating into my bench design was abandoned.

Next would be the Scandinavian style tail vise. That may be great for holding some work, but still didn't offer all the abilities of my simple tail vise.

One that does seem to be able to do all the same work would be a double screw design.

Other than holding something in the vise to be sawn there are many ways to hold work without a tail vise. Even the holding of stock for sawing can be done with clamps or saw benches.

A strategic layout of dog holes is great for planing flat stock. For holding something on edge there are multiple methods of securing it on the bench for mortising or planing.

One of my favorites for planing is "The Claw:"

469281

This was seen on an episode of The Woodright's Shop.

jtk

[Mark Rainey]

Some truths in no particular order:



People pick and choose the Roubo plates that fit their philosophy and worldview, and attempt to rationalize away the other plates that don't; rather than focus on the so-called "German" bench (harder to build) the focus was on the joinery benches which Schwarz saw could fairly easily be made from glued up pine. Substitute 2x6s for 2x4s and you pretty much can't help but come up with a "Roubo." And the original article by Bob Tarule in Fine Woodworking was frankly better, thought it didn't really offer a strategy using construction pine. It was essentially a close reproduction, except perhaps for length. Most people aren't building 14' tall palace doors for the King of France. Some people have managed to ban German and Scandinavian woodworking from the Western canon. Kind of stupid to me. That said, Frid and Klausz covered Scandinavian style benches about as well as they could be covered, leaving Schwarz little room for the schtick and spin he tends to put on things.
Schwarz knows that people have a fixation on shop furniture and fixtures. They're a damn sight easier to make than a reproduction Georgian fully veneered barred glass door secretary, or something out of a Chippendale, Sheraton, or Hepplewhite design book; there's always a 'better' bench, toolchest, shooting board, etc. waiting to be made. Rinse and repeat. That'll be $34.99 thank-you-very-much. This all must be really amusing to the people at Taunton Press, who produced better books and articles on workbenchs and tool chests years and years ago. Perhaps imitation is in fact the sincerest form of flattery.
After realizing the truth behind #2, the rest is easy: just publish books and articles about old designs, from old books, and build a little story and narrative around them. The only thing (possibly) original is the little story. The rest could be had with a $100 investment in old books from Amazon, most of which have copyrights that expired long ago.
If you could transport yourself back in time, and walk out into the French countryside and cut down an old oak [or whatever], and take the center slab out of it for a workbench top then why the heck wouldn't you? Can't do the forestry work yourself? Just order it from your supplier. Cost of doing business, and after all it was big business.



Charles, as always, uncommon wisdom.

[Luke Dupont]

I currently have a Scandinavian style bench with a face vise. I made it about 15 years ago. I'll be making a new one this next year. It'll be a whole lot simpler, and longer. I've found that the vise racks, and is a pain, I don't use the end vise, I made it a couple feet too short, I don't like storage in the base (easy enough to get rid of though), and the legs would be a lot better off being coplanar with the edge. I also found that I end up using holdfasts and stops more than anything else. So, I'll have a flat top with lots of round holes for holdfasts, a planing stop, and one leg vise. Why? Because I have found that this is what I tend to actually use anyway. It also means I won't bother with making square dog holes again, so that simplifies making the top a lot.

The style, whether Roubo, Moravaian, Shaker, or English really doesn't matter too much to me. Although, since I won't move the thing again, so having a break-down bench really isn't interesting for me. Since I am a mostly 'beer powered' woodworker, and so I dimension most of my stock and mortise by hand, I need the top to be solid and stay there. Since I tend to clamp things to the bench, I doubt I'd go with the English (I wasn't a fan of the big apron on the last one I used) and since I don't like storage in the bench, no Shaker for me either. It's not my first bench. It won't be my last bench, that I'm sure of. At least, I hope I continue building things long enough to become annoyed with working on the next bench.

The existing bench will continue to live on, and serve, in my shop.. as an auxiliary bench. Something wonderful about de-emphasizing my power tools has been opening up floor space for more useful working surfaces. Maybe in a year or two I'll just be left with a planar, mini-lathe and a bandsaw, which sounds about right to me. Some of this reminds me of wheel sizes in mountain biking ;)

Interesting! I have used a (granted, somewhat crude, but totally functional) Roubo bench in the past.

This time around, I made a more Scandinavian (but without the fancy vises... See, Sloyd benches or turn of the century cabinet maker's benches, which are both just scandinavian/continental European benches with simple vises) style workbench. And while I've only just began using it (time will tell if my preferences change, I guess), I love it for exactly all of the reasons you don't! I needed something light weight and moveable, able to be knocked down, and I am already enjoying having an end vise which allows me to, given the bench's lightweight and small size, position my work in either vise to get the added stability of the length of the bench rather than the narrower width. The dog system is also really nice for holding small pieces. Moreover, for much the same reasons, the leg assembly is constructed such that I can just place a foot on it in order to use my body weight to make the bench extra secure, if I am putting considerable lateral force on the bench which might cause it to move.

I also wanted storage underneath it and mounted to it, because I don't have space for a proper tool cabinet.

Of course, I love the Roubo and Moravian benches as well, but for my particular needs and the kind of work that I do, and workspace that I have, this little Scandinavian-ish sloyd style bench is, so far, proving to be ideal.

[steven c newman]

The first wood workbench I made.....was done following Norm Abram's build....yeah, THAT long ago.....found I liked working off the top of my large (Craftsman 113ish) tablesaw instead....so, I gave "Norm's Bench" to my brother....that he has against the back wall of his garage...with a peg board on that wall to hold his tools....

Have also used a 2x 10 pine plank, with Visegrips Finger clamps (think welder's clamps) to clamp the plank to a 6' Werner Stepladder....used that to build both a saw bench, and my current bench.

First day on a new job site: Build a set of steps with a small landing for the Jobsite Office Trailer....then go and build a pair of sawhorses to use for the duration of that job....when the Tool Trailer arrived, IF it was just a semi style....we had to also build a set of stairs for the back end...the width of the trailer, without any step up into the trailer itself (tripping hazard).....Not too bad for the Concrete Foundation Crew?

One has to adapt to what is on hand, what one has to work with, and what one has to work on. And, as long as it isn't pouring down rain...in any weather, year round. Work, or ya don't get paid, simple as that.

There IS a B&D Work-a-Mate in my shed....for when I am working around outside the house....even has a new, treated pine top, with a thicker set of jaws for work holding....( burned the old top, as it was just a bunch of loose layers...) It is a Type 2 version...a bit more solid than the ones currently out. When I was building the new front porch deck...and needed a place to saw the lumber on...it did quite well, I also brought out of the shop the Stanley No. 2246 Mitre Box and saw....stair step railing and spindles,,,

Being doing this sort of stuff since Junior High School...I'm 68 at the moment...

I can remember back to Scott Phillips' FIRST season.....where his bench was against the shop wall, with plenty of windows for light..LONG before KREG found him...

[Carl Beckett]

I read his book.

Read some other books

Looked at lots of pictures.

Built a Roubo with some wood from a tree on family property, because its what I had. I have to say it was onery to work with (Elm).

Love the bench.

My previous bench was two layers of 3/4 plywood on a 2x4 frame (shop note plans, early in my ww journey). Loved that bench also and handed it down to a friend that gets tremendous use out of it to this day.

The bench before that was a black and decker workmate. Actually I still have that but dont really use it as a WW bend anymore. But again it gets used.

Sometimes I waller around on the floor with stuff.

Would love to build another bench, it is a fun project. But cant find any reason to. I do appreciate that Mr Swartz is passionate about workbenches and likes to build them. And share his opinion - he is a better writer than I.... and I learned a lot from his material.

I dont mind disagreement. Everyone gets to have an opinion. I take exception if someone is belittling or disrespectful to others just because they do not share the same perspective. I, as the listener, get to filter what information I take in whatever way I choose. AND, I am wrong a lot. That doesnt bother me either (and in fact it is one of the most effective ways to learn).

So thats my opinion.