Talk me out of building an eight foot bench please.

[Scott Winners]

I think I can make it work in my space. I am going to leave enough overhang past the legs to maybe install a tail vise on the distaff end in the future, or whack a little length off and not have a tail vise.

My current bench coming out of the old more cramped shop space is all Doug Fir, 24x48 top. The old bench meets my needs in every way except it only weighs about 135#. I am sick and tired of chasing my workpieces around the shop floor. I want to hit at least 300# and don't mind going over a little bit. The one time I had a stable workpiece on the old bench, I had 135# of bench, about 50# of crap on the shelf, and 8 feet of 8x8 timber clamped down to the bench top. That piece I could work on, hard and fast, with both hands.

My tentative plan is local birch top, 8/4 by 6" nominal, with homestore DF 4x6 for the long stretchers. I have the four legs already seasoning, 4x7 nominal for the leg vise end, 4x6 nominal for the distaff end, all FOHC Doug Fir, between the 4 legs there is one knot too many to grade them select structural as a single plank. I want to find some 6x6 for the short stretchers, but I don't want to use spruce because it loses length as it seasons, and I don't want to use local birch because at that size there will inevitably be pith on center.

The main conflict for me is do I build a 6 foot top or an 8 foot top. I like being able to hook the toe of my work boot under the long stretcher to sort of clamp myself to the bench when planing long boards. I like being able to get the ball of my foot on the long stretcher and my knee under the benchtop to sort of clamp myself to the bench for little fussy things that require a moderate to large hammer. I like having having the benchtop at a comfortable working height.

I am 5' 10" and buy my clothes off the rack. With a six foot bench and my ergonomic parameters I am not confident I can hit the 300# bench mass goal. With an 8 foot bench I should have no trouble bringing it home in all four parameters.

Does anyone with an 8 foot bench, anything over 90" long really, regret building that big? The only thing I will have to change to my scale model shop layout to make this work is move the sharpening stones to where I can just turn around to use them without having to walk around the end of the bench. To reestablish a hollow grind, I will have to walk around the end of the bench to get to the grinder.

I am going to start reading up on the various US aircraft carriers. Wasp kinda sounds like a good nickname for a bench. So does Essex. I wonder if it would make someone twitch were I to carve shallow little lines in my bench top to represent steam catapults.

[clinton cox]

Do you want to be able to move your bench or move it in the future? I'm currently building a 72" Moravian workbench because it is the largest I can fit in the room I rent. But I do know that if I could add a foot or two I absolutely would.

[Greg Parrish]

Scott, I built my recent bench build at 73” long and left more overhand on the right side for a sliding tail vise, and I put a leg vise on the left. It worked out very well without having the size of an 8’ bench. In my case, 8’ was just too big to easily fit. So far I haven’t found anything that would necessitate the extra length. However, I don’t typically build much with material longer than 6’ anyway. Mine is probably somewhere between 250 to 300 pound range as it sits with the vises installed. And, the foot print is large enough that it simply doesn’t move, even with aggressive pushing or pulling while working on the top. I do have weight sitting on the bottom shelf which helps also. Anyway, just sharing so that you see an option for a 6 footer that still has room for a tail vise. I followed the Woodwhisperer Guild Hybrid bench plans but modified to my current setup.

506693

[David Carroll]

Here's a vote for the 6-foot length. I regularly work at the ends of the bench so a tight fitting bench without 4 feet of space at either end would be an encumbrance. If the major factor is the weight of the bench, it's easy enough to add weight. I had a long bench where I used to live and I found I used the same 4 feet all the time, the rest collected tools and debris that inevitably had to be moved in order to do something or other for the rare times when I did require more of the bench.

Of course, people work in different ways, but the largest piece of furniture that I ever built was a wardrobe that measured just over 6 feet tall. Unless you are planning to regularly build pieces this large, or running long lengths of molding, the excess length isn't really necessary (in my opinion).

I do think it's human nature to build big and strong, "just because," or "just in case," But I do think that 6-feet is the optimal length for most things and for the rare occasions when you need a longer top, using a portable stand or tall sawhorse to support the overhanging board works fine.

These days I have downsized to a 4-foot hobbyists bench that I bought decades ago. It does 90% of what I need it to do. It's light, so I store tools and other heavy things in the base cabinet. It moves when I plane vigorously, so I have blocks screwed into the floor so it can't move. I have moved 4 times in the past 5 years, I appreciate its portability. I take the top off and I can carry it myself, the base, when it is empty is manageable by one person and a breeze to move by two.

In my opinion the requirement for a massive, heavy bench is overblown. What is important is that it is sturdily-built and stiff. The rest can be worked around.

YMMV

DC

[Luke Dupont]

Talk you out of building an eight foot bench?
Why, that's easy, sir!
I like tall benches too, but unless you're a 16ft giant, 8ft might be a bit tall to work comfortably.
:D

[glenn bradley]

My last bench was built shorter than my previous bench despite nearly doubling my shop size. Extra work surface come with a larger footprint that robs you of valuable shop rel estate IMHO. A bench should be as big as you need and no larger. Extra surface just takes up space that could be better used, collects tools, parts, and spoil that should otherwise be put away, stored, or tossed. I do like my bench deeper than most at about 30" since it is often used for dry assembly. Your mileage will most certainly vary. Current bench is about 30" by 75" including the vise chop.

506694

[Warren Mickley]

Larry Williams once argued that historically a cabinetmaker only needed a five or six foot bench. I pointed out that a large chest has mouldings that are seven feet long or so, and would be difficult to make on such a bench. I don't think he had done much hand work.

Stuff like doors and door frames can also be very awkward on a short bench.

I would not want a grinder in the vicinity or even the same room as a bench.

[Eric Brown]

To keep a bench moving you can use rubber pads to increase the friction. You can also lag it to the floor. As for length, if the bench has all sides accessible, the longer it is the more you have to walk to get around it. My bench is in the middle and is seven foot long. I have a twin screw vice on the end and sometimes extent it for added length. Overhang helps if you do a lot of casework.

[Jimmy Harris]

To keep a bench moving you can use rubber pads to increase the friction. You can also lag it to the floor. As for length, if the bench has all sides accessible, the longer it is the more you have to walk to get around it. My bench is in the middle and is seven foot long. I have a twin screw vice on the end and sometimes extent it for added length. Overhang helps if you do a lot of casework.


I agree with this approach. Make the length of the bench whatever length works best. Don't make it bigger just to make it heavier. If you want to make it heavier, either consider lag bolts, build some shelves to store heavy stuff in, or just attach some weight to it (concrete bags or even weightlifting weights that can always be found cheaply on the used market, locally). Making the bench bigger than you need in order to make it heavier could be introducing a new problem in order to solve an old one. It would be better to address the primary problem directly. Plus, putting more weight lower on the bench will make it more stable than concentrating more weight higher up.

[Jim Koepke]

I am sick and tired of chasing my workpieces around the shop floor.

That used to be a problem with my lightweight bench. A bucket with about 80 lbs of concrete fixed that.

506735

There is a notch cut in the bottom of the bucket to fit over the lower rail. There was also a rope added to hold the bucket to the legs.

As far as figuring if an 8' bench will work for you, try clamping a couple of 8' 2X4s to the bench to see how it works for moving around in the shop. If it works, great. If it doesn't work, then you saved some lumber.

jtk

[Reed Gray]

Well, if you have room for it, why not? I would say that making sure you have room to move around the bench for any and all phases of what you are going to build, then, if it still fits, go ahead and make it. My shop always looks like a hurricane went through it. I can stack way more stuff on an 8 foot bench than I can on a 6 foot bench. Planning to add one already, and the infeed/table/bench behind my table saw is 4 by 8.

robo hippy

[Cameron Wood]

My bench is 7' long & that's good although the far end is generally piled with stuff. Longer stock prep tends to happen on the assembly/outfeed table.

If your plan is for an 8/4 thick benchtop, make it thicker. That will make a big difference in stability. Mine is a 3"x24" glue-lam, and it is not even fastened to the base- it just sits there and doesn't move. Probably about #500 as it sits.

506758

[Dave Anderson NH]

When I built my "new" bench about 15 years ago I bought and used 8-foot lengths of white ash. After putting it in place I discovered it was just a hair too long for me to comfortably access all 4 sides. Enter the Bosch electric circular saw and presto the bench became 90" long. Here is a picture of it when brand new. It no longer is either clean nor pristine in any way, shape, or manner.

[Mel Fulks]

Nice Vise, Dave “They don’t come no better !” When I made my bench I fell for the old books advise to make them out of beech.
I had a hard time finding the stuff. Then I read beech was used mainly ‘cuz it was cheap and plentiful. The old books are a lot more
frugal than the new books ! I have no doubt that at least one Brazilian Rosewood bench exists !

[steven c newman]

Hmmmm...
506776
5' long x 16" wide x 34" high....is the best fit for MY shop....YMMV, of course....and, it suits the work I do..from working small boxes and stands
506777
to chest of drawers, and Garden Benches. And even the computer desk I am sitting at right now.

Besides...these arms of mine can only reach so far while I am holding a tool....

IF you all want to use up that much shop space on just a work bench...fine....much like my tools....I tend to size the tools I use to the tasks I do. Which includes the Bench.

[Warren Mickley]

Nice Vise, Dave “They don’t come no better !” When I made my bench I fell for the old books advise to make them out of beech.
I had a hard time finding the stuff. Then I read beech was used mainly ‘cuz it was cheap and plentiful.

Beech has been used because it is the premier bench wood. It is reasonably hard and heavy and it has the ability to absorb shock and vibration, which is nice it you are working on it all day. Much better than hard maple.

Andre Roubo (1769) says that benches are commonly made of beech and elm (both of which absorb shock), but that beech is preferred and most common because it has a finer grain. It is kind of annoying to write on a piece of paper on a bench made of ash or oak or elm because of the pores in those woods.

[Mike Mason]

Beech has been used because it is the premier bench wood. It is reasonably hard and heavy and it has the ability to absorb shock and vibration, which is nice it you are working on it all day. Much better than hard maple.

Andre Roubo (1769) says that benches are commonly made of beech and elm (both of which absorb shock), but that beech is preferred and most common because it has a finer grain. It is kind of annoying to write on a piece of paper on a bench made of ash or oak or elm because of the pores in those woods.

I also have read that beech was, and is, used in European benches and tools primarily because it is the most plentiful/cheap wood that is pretty good for that application, but that there are other woods in North America that are better suited and cheaper than beech is in North America.

Also, I don't know that everything that Roubo (or anyone else) said 250+ years ago is valid today - the wood today is different (slow growth in a forest full of competing trees vs. fast growth in a managed forest), we have vastly more knowledge in the field of wood technology, etc. It's a romantic sentiment, but not everything old is better - for example, I've looked at a half dozen ca. 1750 highboys in museums with their cross-grain construction on the lower sides that allows the use of pinned mortise and tenon joinery with the legs, and I have yet to see one that isn't cracked on both sides. The reproduction that I built many years ago, using a Carlyle Lynch drawing of a museum piece, soon suffered the same fate, which makes it more true to the original. The finest craftsmen back then didn't fully comprehend wood movement and they didn't leave room in the mortises or slot the holes in their drawbored tenons. (Having said that, what many craftsmen accomplished back then with the tools they had available to them is truly amazing to me).

I have five workbenches that I have made, ranging from 5 ft to 7 ft in length, and although a longer workbench would be great, I've never really had a project that required one, and I've built three eight-ft tall armoires for our home with nine-ft ceilings. I agree that if the primary reason is to gain extra weight, either adding weight on a low shelf or lagging it to the floor are better options. Another option might be to increase friction by adding "crubber" or a similar material to the bottom of the four posts. It's easy to add weight to a shelf under the workbench; in fact it's hard NOT to do it unless you have a huge shop with more storage space than you need.

Some of the old benches that have survived were 10 ft or longer, but that may have been done to allow two people to work on a bench at the same time, or it may have been done intentionally just to gain some nearby space for tools and wood.

If the OP has the room, I doubt that he will regret having a longer bench, whether or not it's really required.

[scott lipscomb]

"The finest craftsmen back then didn't fully comprehend wood movement"

I have a hard time believing that.

[Warren Mickley]

I also have read that beech was, and is, used in European benches and tools primarily because it is the most plentiful/cheap wood that is pretty good for that application, but that there are other woods in North America that are better suited and cheaper than beech is in North America.

Also, I don't know that everything that Roubo (or anyone else) said 250+ years ago is valid today - the wood today is different (slow growth in a forest full of competing trees vs. fast growth in a managed forest), .

You don't know? I should say! You picked the wrong tree to suggest that the wood is different.

Beech is a climax species in the forest. It grows in mature forests because it can endure under a shady canopy with competition. Fast growth in a managed forest? You are thinking of some other tree.

[steven c newman]

Starting to sound just like a Classic Sharpening thread, isn't it?

Need to show these people WHERE to get the same sized SLABS Roubo used.....OR, just let them buy and used the timber that is native to their own area.

"Those who dwell in the past....."

There are a few out there, that claim that to be a "True Neanderthal Woodworker" One has to work only by Candlelight..NO electric lights are permitted in THEIR shop. Except..Neanderthals used STONE Tools.....hmmm...

[Mel Fulks]

Beech was also used in Windsor chairs. Easily bent. Today beech chairs would be a big deal on late night TV commercials for ‘Beech Nuts

[Cameron Wood]

"The finest craftsmen back then didn't fully comprehend wood movement"

I have a hard time believing that.



Even farmers of the day took into account wood species for different parts of a piece; season, and even phase of the moon for harvesting wood, seasoning, and other factors that we climate-controlled box-dwellers sniff at.

[Scott Winners]

As far as figuring if an 8' bench will work for you, try clamping a couple of 8' 2X4s to the bench to see how it works for moving around in the shop. If it works, great. If it doesn't work, then you saved some lumber.

jtk

You guys have made a bunch of really good points, all of you.

The one that works best for me is this one from Jim K, just clamp a couple 8 foot 2x4s to my existing 48 inch bench top once I get it moved into the new place and see what I think.

Practical, easy, cheap, thanks Jim.

[Scott Winners]

My last bench was built shorter than my previous bench despite nearly doubling my shop size. Extra work surface come with a larger footprint that robs you of valuable shop rel estate IMHO. A bench should be as big as you need and no larger. Extra surface just takes up space that could be better used, collects tools, parts, and spoil that should otherwise be put away, stored, or tossed. I do like my bench deeper than most at about 30" since it is often used for dry assembly. Your mileage will most certainly vary. Current bench is about 30" by 75" including the vise chop.



Yes to all. I agree a bench should be no larger than it needs to be, but it also needs to be heavy enough, stiff enough for the user. In the new space my shop is moving to, I simply don't have room to keep all my tools, keep my four foot bench AND add an assembly table. One of the attractions of an 8 foot bench to me in this unique situation is I might end up with an 8 foot bench to do joinery on, and then use the same surface as the assembly table.

And I might cut it back to 90 inches. Or 80. But if I build a 72" long benchtop and need an extra 8 inches someday, opportunity lost.

[Scott Winners]

I can't realistically quote all y'all, but thank you for the discussion.

I don't have a lot of botany background, but I am fairly confident I read somewhere European Beech and American Beech, though very similar in appearance, are not actually in the same genus taxonomically.

I should have specified my anticipated bench top will be laminated 8/4 birch, nominal 6" width - for a glued up top nominal 24x6x96, about 320 pounds for the slab. I can get 8/4 local air dried birch for $1 per bf, about 30 cents per pound, but I am going to have to pick through a lot of planks to come up with 12 keepers. With the help of the local HS football team there should be no trouble dragging it out to a moving truck, tipping it up on end, and then tipping it slab down onto the floor of a moving truck, for the price of a couple phone calls, a couple pizzas and a couple liters of sugary soda pop. Call it a team building event when you phone your local high school.

I do have some hand planes that can make edge/trim profiles, and I am not getting any younger. When I have fooled with shapes/ edge banding on previous projects, I find when I can do the whole profile on one stick, and then cut the shaped stick into shorter parts the trim looks better on the project compared to trying to cut the same profile on several short pieces.

I keep my bench planes on the shelf under my bench and have (personally) no room for much else under there. The idea of using a bucket of concrete or a lunchbox planer on that shelf is valid, but it does not work for me in my unique situation. On behalf of future search button users, thank you for the good ideas.

There was a little talk about cabinetry I should address. I really like 9-10 foot ceilings in my home. A bit of headroom makes any room of any size feel 'bigger' than the floor plan shows. One of the builds I have coming up will be a lower wall unit with perhaps a 30x30 inch face, about 16 inches deep, with 4-6 drawers in it. The secondary wood for the drawers will be some kind of cedar. When it is done I can put all the heirloom textiles in there and not worry about them any more. One of my great grandma's was a tatter, with the little spools of white thread to make like doilies and so on? She was an animal with those little spools. Me and my sister and all the cousins have several of her pieces, and we all trot them out on the major holidays, but I don't want to worry about them anymore, they are going in cedar drawers. Above that I want to build a china cabinet of some sort with windowed side walls and windowed front doors. In there I want to put stuff like the salt and pepper shaker set my G-grandma Pauline's uncle Bill brought home from the 1905 San Francisco expo. The holes in the pepper shaker in that set are too darn small, I don't like my black pepper ground that fine, but you get the idea.

At the end of the day, for future moving days the young people will be looking at items perhaps 30 x 60 x 16 and others at 30 x 30 x 16 (nominal) that can fit under 8 foot ceilings if they need to.

Using a doe's foot and a holdfast to clamp a 60" plank for working on the face, on a 72" bench, is going to be problematic. If an 8 foot top doesn't work in my shop I will have to build ~6 feet and will need a tail vise to make it happen.

Thanks again for each of your various insightful points of view.

[Rob Luter]

I wish I had the space for a longer bench. Mine is a whole 60" long. As it is it's about the only thing in the shop that's not on wheels. Using the table saw, planer, belt sander, etc., is like playing a game of Tetris.

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51748353708_ecfef4c367_b.jpg

[Tom Trees]

I'd not want my bench any shorter, here's a two meter beam for reference, though I had to remove my planing stop to test it.
By happen-stance I used this lab counter stuff and need shim it flat, (turned out to be the perfect height)
506819
The angle poise lamp (situated on the bench) will just about reach the full capacity of it.
506820
A full width planing stop, and a board to make the lamp more comfortable
506821
The retractable casters design is a bit agricultural, and a bit of a pain when tucked away if need be, but at least it's not four of them,
and I must mention gets moved about a lot more than I thought I'd be moving it, due to ease.
My next base for the bench behind will have to be tidier looking and more functional, i.e able to be easily used from either side of the bench,
bit other than that it's sound.
506825

Tom

[Monte Milanuk]

Larry Williams once argued that historically a cabinetmaker only needed a five or six foot bench. I pointed out that a large chest has mouldings that are seven feet long or so, and would be difficult to make on such a bench.


Warren,

Just curious, and asking from a position of ignorance, having never done mouldings by hand... but couldn't a person make a sticking board of some sort for the occasional bit of moulding, one long enough to overhang the bench on either end without affecting the function too much, but still something that could be stood up in a corner or hung on the wall when not in use? Then a 6 ft bench would accommodate the other 98+% of the day-to-day usage? Not as ideal as a bigger bench, but possibly workable?

Yes/no/maybe?

Monte

[Warren Mickley]

Warren,

Just curious, and asking from a position of ignorance, having never done mouldings by hand... but couldn't a person make a sticking board of some sort for the occasional bit of moulding, one long enough to overhang the bench on either end without affecting the function too much, but still something that could be stood up in a corner or hung on the wall when not in use? Then a 6 ft bench would accommodate the other 98+% of the day-to-day usage? Not as ideal as a bigger bench, but possibly workable?

Yes/no/maybe?

Monte

Yes one could do that, although most sticking boards rely on the rigidity of the underlying bench. And making a precise sticking board longer than the bench is a bit work also.

I have made ten and eleven foot mouldings on an eight foot bench on occasion; it is just a whole lot easier if the bench is longer.

[Tom M King]

A longer bench would have been better.

[Mike Mason]

"The finest craftsmen back then didn't fully comprehend wood movement"

I have a hard time believing that.

Then why did they use cross grain construction that ultimately failed? That seems pretty basic. I think we know a lot more about wood technology than they did 250 years ago.

[Mike Mason]

You don't know? I should say! You picked the wrong tree to suggest that the wood is different.

Beech is a climax species in the forest. It grows in mature forests because it can endure under a shady canopy with competition. Fast growth in a managed forest? You are thinking of some other tree.

I wasn't specifically talking about Beech, I was merely making the comment that not everything said or done 250 years ago is valid today - the materials can be quite different, for one example.

[Mike Mason]

Even farmers of the day took into account wood species for different parts of a piece; season, and even phase of the moon for harvesting wood, seasoning, and other factors that we climate-controlled box-dwellers sniff at.

I agree, they knew about different woods having different hardness and ease of working, that ring-porous wood like oak splits readily but interlocked grain wood such as elm doesn't, that the sap runs in the spring, etc. I still wonder why the most talented cabinetmakers and furniture makers used cross-grain construction at times, even after seeing early on that it failed.

[Prashun Patel]

My bench is only 5 feet and I've planed plenty of boards longer than that. My legs are slightly angled like a saw horse, which I attribute to it's stability.

While you have the space, the only reason you appear to want an 8 foot bench is to get to your mass requirements. You appear to prefer a slightly smaller bench for workflow reasons - very valid.

I think you can get to your stability requirements a different way: consider making a slightly thicker top, thicker legs, bolting the legs to the floor, bolting a cleat to the floor against which 2 of the legs can brace, slanting the leg vise side legs 5-10 degrees, or incorporating a lower shelf and weighing that down.

[Cameron Wood]

Then why did they use cross grain construction that ultimately failed? That seems pretty basic. I think we know a lot more about wood technology than they did 250 years ago.



In the future it may be questioned whether we knew much about wood technology based on buildings that rot in ten years (attached housing, stucco, poor quality wood and wood products), and throw-away IKEA type furniture which will not last long enough to be antique.

[Jim Koepke]

I agree, they knew about different woods having different hardness and ease of working, that ring-porous wood like oak splits readily but interlocked grain wood such as elm doesn't, that the sap runs in the spring, etc. I still wonder why the most talented cabinetmakers and furniture makers used cross-grain construction at times, even after seeing early on that it failed.

It might have been a simple as the resistance by the best woodworkers to share "trade secrets" with their competition.

There is also some of the abuse items received from the owners who may not have known not to push a fully loaded highboy across the floor instead of moving it on a dolly or at least something under it on which it could be slid.

I've seen items with one side facing a sunny window, having failed due to the constant heating and cooling cycles.

jtk

[James Pallas]

Remember when everyone wanted a pool table in the basement. Many of them had you making masse shots on one side and one end. Don’t get yourself in that spot. I say 4’ minimum all around if you want to enjoy woodworking.
Jim

[Scott Winners]

Remember when everyone wanted a pool table in the basement. Many of them had you making masse shots on one side and one end. Don’t get yourself in that spot. I say 4’ minimum all around if you want to enjoy woodworking.
Jim

Fair point.

[Scott Winners]

My bench is only 5 feet and I've planed plenty of boards longer than that. My legs are slightly angled like a saw horse, which I attribute to it's stability.

While you have the space, the only reason you appear to want an 8 foot bench is to get to your mass requirements. You appear to prefer a slightly smaller bench for workflow reasons - very valid.

I think you can get to your stability requirements a different way: consider making a slightly thicker top, thicker legs, bolting the legs to the floor, bolting a cleat to the floor against which 2 of the legs can brace, slanting the leg vise side legs 5-10 degrees, or incorporating a lower shelf and weighing that down.

There is good stuff in here.

One not previously explicated in thread, the wife and I are intentionally downsizing into a rental so we can get out, let the trades in to the big old house and sell the big old house on the way to building our forever home. So lag bolts in the floor are valid ideas for homeowners, we are currently renting and cannot do those things in this space.

I am confident I mentioned earlier in this thread I like to hook the toe of my workboot under the front stretcher when planing long boards. I want the top surface at a comfortable working height, and I like being able to comfortably fit both the ball of my foot and the knee of the same leg between the top of the front stretcher and the underside of the bench slab so I can clamp 'myself' to the bench while still having both hands free.

I am 5' 10" tall, about 178 cm tall, around 190# or 86 kilos, I can pretty much buy clothes that fit off the rack. I did grow up on a farm. It is my experience with my first bench that the bench and the work piece clamped to it need to be up around 300# total for me to work hard, fast, effective, and precise with both hands.

We are not in the GWPT subsection here. I am not talking about a tracksaw with an integrated router table. I am talking about a mortise chisel and a mallet. I am talking about sawing and chopping a couple dozen dovetails in 30 minutes. I can do dovetails on my lightweight existing bench, but my effort, my output, is limited by the stability of the workpiece, which is limited by the relatively low mass of my current bench and my darn bifocals. I did order new glasses today with a current Rx; but cutting dovetails in bifocals is also a pain in the neck just like using a lightweight bench.

As far as workflow, I am moving into 12x24 single car garage with my joinery tools and my homeowner tools, in my late 50s. It is tight. Giving up on the idea of a separate assembly table and trying to shoehorn in one larger bench to be both the joinery bench and the assembly table I have picked up some floor space. I did re-arrange the paper cutouts on my scale model today and feel pretty OK about my possible workflow options.

We'll see how it goes, I do appreciate your insightful comments.

[Tom Trees]

How many of those are actually playa's?
I used to have a little one the size of a book when I were a kid, should be still around at me folks somewhere, by that logic...

[Mike Mason]

It might have been a simple as the resistance by the best woodworkers to share "trade secrets" with their competition.

There is also some of the abuse items received from the owners who may not have known not to push a fully loaded highboy across the floor instead of moving it on a dolly or at least something under it on which it could be slid.

I've seen items with one side facing a sunny window, having failed due to the constant heating and cooling cycles.

jtk

Knowing not to use cross-grain construction isn't a trade secret, and it was the best woodworkers who did it. In a six-board chest, the wrought nails give enough that the cross-grain construction isn't a problem. In the drawbored mortise & tenon joints using cross-grain construction as I described above (i.e., the lowboy portion of a highboy dresser), the sides invariably crack.

What I described isn't caused by someone dragging a piece across the floor.

[Mike Mason]

In the future it may be questioned whether we knew much about wood technology based on buildings that rot in ten years (attached housing, stucco, poor quality wood and wood products), and throw-away IKEA type furniture which will not last long enough to be antique.

What you describe are poor economic decisions made by producers and consumers; let's not confuse that with the science of wood technology.

[Richard Coers]

Out of 42 comments, did anyone talk you out of it?

[Cameron Wood]

What you describe are poor economic decisions made by producers and consumers; let's not confuse that with the science of wood technology.

The makers and purchasers (or employers of the makers) of the highboys were also making economic decisions. They did what they did but that doesn't mean that they did not understand wood movement.

I recall looking at some Maloof pieces in a gallery, and they had glue drips on the underside, but he undoubtedly understood glue drips.

[steven c newman]

They were too busy arguing about what wood was used....

[Scott Winners]

Out of 42 comments, did anyone talk you out of it?

I am going to try Jim K's idea, the clamp 8 foot boards onto my 4 foot bench and see how much time spend walking around the new length. Old bench should be in the new space in about a week.

[Mike Mason]

The makers and purchasers (or employers of the makers) of the highboys were also making economic decisions. They did what they did but that doesn't mean that they did not understand wood movement.

I recall looking at some Maloof pieces in a gallery, and they had glue drips on the underside, but he undoubtedly understood glue drips.

I don' think you understand what I'm talking about when I say that they used cross-grain construction on the lowboys; it has nothing to do with an economic decision.

[Kent A Bathurst]

I am going to try Jim K's idea, the clamp 8 foot boards onto my 4 foot bench and see how much time spend walking around the new length. Old bench should be in the new space in about a week.

Scott - remember what I told you last time. Don't walk out of the store thinking about the pearls you did not get.

Oh - yeah - keep buying the smaller bottles of jojoba oil. Your questions are starting to have a tinge of rationality in them, so the program must be working.

See you in the funny papers.

[Jim Koepke]

I don' think you understand what I'm talking about when I say that they used cross-grain construction on the lowboys; it has nothing to do with an economic decision.

Mike, I think you may have answered your question in an earlier post.


for example, I've looked at a half dozen ca. 1750 highboys in museums with their cross-grain construction on the lower sides that allows the use of pinned mortise and tenon joinery with the legs, and I have yet to see one that isn't cracked on both sides. The reproduction that I built many years ago, using a Carlyle Lynch drawing of a museum piece, soon suffered the same fate, which makes it more true to the original. The finest craftsmen back then didn't fully comprehend wood movement and they didn't leave room in the mortises or slot the holes in their drawbored tenons.

"Back then" the profession of woodworking brought in young workers being trained by older workers who "had always done it how they were taught." The errors of the elders were handed down to the apprentices.

Not too long ago there was an article about how many older pieces used solid corner blocks for mounting legs that were often a source of failure. There were also examples of some makers who used glued up corner blocks which allowed for humidity induced movement, with less likelihood of failure.

The same "we've always done it this way" credo is still enforced to this day. There is and has always been a strong resistance to change. Those who argue for change are often labeled as radicals.

jtk

[Richard Coers]

They were too busy arguing about what wood was used....
Per usual. LOL

[John Kananis]

I had a really short bench at one point. I built an extension that was only a few boards wide (with dog holes) with one long board for the front that was clamped into my face vise. It worked really well. Hope I gave a good visual, I don't have that bench any longer so no pics.

[Cameron Wood]

I don' think you understand what I'm talking about when I say that they used cross-grain construction on the lowboys; it has nothing to do with an economic decision.


I think I understand what you are talking about. I looked at the over 40 photos of lowboys in Wallace Nutting's book, and you can see the cracked side panels in several of them.

In the text on the subject, he says:

"Artisans, however, are often prejudiced in favor of their own particular designs, and they are accustomed to develop one aspect of their art to an extreme. Further, nothing is more difficult than to lead the public taste. The consumer is even more prejudiced in favor of certain forms than the producer."


So they did it because that's the way it was done, as Jim Koepke points out, but those guys knew wood more intimately than you or I ever will, so to think of them as ignorant misses the mark, IMO.

[Eric Brown]

I think y'all missed another possibility, perhaps they wanted it to fail so they could build another in the future. You think planned obsolescence is a new thing?

[Mike Mason]

Mike, I think you may have answered your question in an earlier post.



"Back then" the profession of woodworking brought in young workers being trained by older workers who "had always done it how they were taught." The errors of the elders were handed down to the apprentices.

Not too long ago there was an article about how many older pieces used solid corner blocks for mounting legs that were often a source of failure. There were also examples of some makers who used glued up corner blocks which allowed for humidity induced movement, with less likelihood of failure.

The same "we've always done it this way" credo is still enforced to this day. There is and has always been a strong resistance to change. Those who argue for change are often labeled as radicals.

jtk

Good point, maybe it did have a lot to do with "doing it the way I was taught", whether or not it was the best practice. Thanks.

[Mike Mason]

I think I understand what you are talking about. I looked at the over 40 photos of lowboys in Wallace Nutting's book, and you can see the cracked side panels in several of them.

In the text on the subject, he says:

"Artisans, however, are often prejudiced in favor of their own particular designs, and they are accustomed to develop one aspect of their art to an extreme. Further, nothing is more difficult than to lead the public taste. The consumer is even more prejudiced in favor of certain forms than the producer."


So they did it because that's the way it was done, as Jim Koepke points out, but those guys knew wood more intimately than you or I ever will, so to think of them as ignorant misses the mark, IMO.

You make a good point.

I don't believe I ever called them "ignorant", however; in fact, I pointed out that they did incredible things with the tools and knowledge that they had. Calling them ignorant would be akin to calling Edison ignorant because he didn't know what we know now about electricity, etc. (In fact, he pushed vehemently for DC power distribution while Tesla pushed for AC, a battle that he obviously lost and for good reason.)

[mike stenson]

Late to the party, but I can't in good conscience argue against an 8' bench. I went from a 5' x 28" to an ~8' x 20" bench and it's been a massive improvement in work area.

[Bryan Lee]

Mine is 8’ and I don’t regret it at all. Once you add a vise, tools
on top, etc you will be glad to have more room
for working.

[Tom Bussey]

I build work benches for people and I did build an eight foot work bench. Actually it was a little shorter. I needed it to fit in my 8 foot truck bed with the tail gate up. Now I have a Ranger with a 7 foot bed so Now I cant go over 7 foot with the tail gate up. I had the room to build an eight foot top but in building it I found it a little unhandy for my taste. A bigger bench only allows for a larger flat surface to pile stuff on. Your actual work area will remain small no matter how big it is.

The bench should fit the invirement, but to long makes it a pain to walk around it and you will find your self working from one side.

[Scott Winners]

The bench should fit the environment, but to long makes it a pain to walk around it and you will find your self working from one side.

Fully agree. I built a free standing wall unit in this new rental place behind my workbench. On left and right I have 24x48 inch shelves, the middle 8 feet is just a stud wall with plywood sheathing to hang stuff from. Up top I have a 2x16 foot shelf to store and season incoming lumber.

I have been conscious and intentional about putting the tools I use regularly 'behind me' in the pics I am about to post, with seldom used tools on the visible wall accessible through a narrow passageway on the far side of the bench.

At the end of the day I think I can fit an eight foot bench in here (12x24 single car garage) but I cannot easily fit a 24x48 bench and a separate 24x48 assembly table.

To the left of my bench is a shelf with somewhat/ medium use items like router bits, spare shop vac filter, hard wax finishing supplies, current project small parts; on the floor under that is clamp world. In the middle behind my bench on the plywood wall are infrequently used items, handsaws, striking tools (there is no money to be had around here in rehabbing striking tools) and some art work. To the right of the bench, the 8 foot furring strip Jim K suggested reaches all the way to the island of the misfit benchtop tools, so those I will be able to just lift, twist and deploy.

The only downside here is the pile of lumber I have on the floor. I am deep in a new shop air filter build that is sucking up a bunch of furring strips. Once I get through that there is some QSWO I am probably going to send up to the top shelf so I can think a little bit longer. Under that is some beech that will become a low boarded bench for the mud room to sit on while changing shoes, and under that at floor level is the DF 4x6 and 4x7 that will be the legs for my next bench.

Once I have the floor clear I am going to move some floor machines around and then bring in the 8/4 birch I will need for the next bench top slab at 96 inches.

Jim K, great idea, I am gaining confidence. Kent, I am going for the pearls I really want.

508033508034508035

[Jim Koepke]

Jim K, great idea, I am gaining confidence.

Glad to help.

jtk

[Scott Winners]

Glad to help.

jtk


Don't walk out of the store thinking about the pearls you did not get.


I was at the home store yesterday and happened to notice three 4x6x96 in Doug Fir, all FOHC, minimal knots and I almost bought them. I was thinking about the pearls I wanted.

So today I threw this together with shop scrap. I am going to have to get my scale model floor plan back out and rethink lumber storage by moving scale model paper cutouts around. The two biggest problems I see over and over in single car garage shops are adequate dust collection and significant lumber storage.

But it looks like a beauty, I am going to post a couple pics and go back out there to have some fun.

[Kent A Bathurst]

Whooooa..........

I had not looked in on this thread in a long time. I clicked on the end - Page 5

And I'm looking at my name.

Far out, man. How's the hippie girls shop?

Wish I had a gummy right now...........

[Carl Beckett]

I ended up with TWO benches. They each fit a different workspace in the shop. One is small, and gets as much use as the larger one (perhaps even more, due to the space it occupies lends itself to be used first)

Two benches, thats my vote. :)

[Scott Winners]

I ended up with TWO benches. They each fit a different workspace in the shop. One is small, and gets as much use as the larger one (perhaps even more, due to the space it occupies lends itself to be used first)

Two benches, thats my vote. :)

You are not wrong. I have been diving into the "Hand and Eye" series of three books from Lost Art Press lately. Jim Tolpin is one of the co-authors, and he talks a lot of sense. If you can spare seven minutes of your life, here is seven minutes about why I could benefit from having work surfaces at three different heights.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bBS5-AV81lg

[Charles Edward]

I've worked at a bench that long, and one even longer, and never regretted it for one second.