Another Router Lift Post

[Kevin Smith]

I need some help and/or feedback in making my purchasing decision for a router lift. I've researched this site and from what I've gathered, either the Woodpecker PRL and the JessEm Mast-R-Lift would be good choices for use with my PC-7518.

I've been leaning toward the Woodpecker PRL based on some of the comments I've read - but still have a couple of questions I could use some help with.

1.) Fast Pitch (16 TPI) or Fine Pitch (32 TPI).

I understand the rational (i.e. speed vs. accuracy) but I'm not sure I understand the amount of pain - when choosing the fine pitch. I don't want to wear my arm out using the lift if the value associated with the increase accuracy isn't worth the trade-off. Since above table bit change is a very import feature for me, will I regret purchasing the fine pitch lift.

2.) Do these things ever go on sale or should I just bite-the-bullet at $299.95.


Thanks!

[Jeff Wright]

I, too, am about to buy a lift and router table system. I was all set on the PRL lift until another poster (Pete Brown - thanks Pete!) here suggested I instead consider its cousin, the Woodpecker Quick-Lift QL-420A. The 420A model is designed for the Porter Cable 7518 router. It uses the finer 32 thread for precision but allows you to make quick height adjustments and then make your final fine adjustments. Take a moment and go to this site and scroll down looking for the link to the mini-video clip demonstrating its design. It's the best of both worlds . . . quick macro adjustment coupled with fine adjustment (above the table, too!). No compromise.

http://www.woodpeck.com/quicklift420.html

Also, check the thread below for some more insights:

http://www.sawmillcreek.org/showthread.php?p=526852#post526852

And finally, if you haven't already, read the review of the QuickLift here:

http://www.newwoodworker.com/reviews/wdpkrsquickliftrvu.html

[Dewayne Reding]

I'm not sure about the Woodpecker. I just bought the Jessem today for $191 and free shipping from Amazon. You have to enter the promotional code 20OFFPTA I don't know how long the sale is on, but it seems like a good price.

[Kevin Smith]

I, too, am about to buy a lift and router table system. I was all set on the PRL lift until another poster (Pete Brown - thanks Pete!) here suggested I instead consider its cousin, the Woodpecker Quick-Lift QL-420A. The 420A model is designed for the Porter Cable 7518 router. It uses the finer 32 thread for precision but allows you to make quick height adjustments and then make your final fine adjustments. Take a moment and go to this site and scroll down looking for the link to the mini-video clip demonstrating its design. It's the best of both worlds . . . quick macro adjustment coupled with fine adjustment (above the table, too!). No compromise.

http://www.woodpeck.com/quicklift420.html

Also, check the thread below for some more insights:

http://www.sawmillcreek.org/showthread.php?p=526852#post526852

And finally, if you haven't already, read the review of the QuickLift here:

http://www.newwoodworker.com/reviews/wdpkrsquickliftrvu.html
Jeff,

Thanks for your thoughts… I agree, the quick-lift seems to address both setup problems. However, the biggest concern I had with the quick-lift 420 was the router mounting mechanism. It doesn't seem nearly as substantial as the clamping assembly provided on the PRL.

[Terry Kelly]

I have the PRL and love it.....It's the 32 tpi when I have to lift router out of the plate for a bit change I made an attachment for my battery screw gun to help out there,not needing to crank it all the way by hand, just do it a slow speed not all out.... But yeah the thing is build like a brick s**thouse.... I have no regrets on buying it, I had looked at a few of the others and felt it was the best built one that I had seen..Not to knock any of the others out there it was my preference.

[Jeff Wright]

Jeff,

Thanks for your thoughts… I agree, the quick-lift seems to address both setup problems. However, the biggest concern I had with the quick-lift 420 was the router mounting mechanism. It doesn't seem nearly as substantial as the clamping assembly provided on the PRL.

Email Peter Brown (on this forum) and ask him the question. I understand he has both and most often defaults to using the QuickLift instead of the PRL. He can no doubt answer your question.

Peter, if you're reading this, chime in! :)

[Pete Brown]

As mentioned, I have both the PRL and the Quick Lift. I have Milwaukee 5625 motors mounted in both. The Milwaukee is a substantial, heavy motor.

The PRL has a more substantial motor mount and a nicer (from an engineering standpoint) lift mechanism. It captures the motor between two posts whereas the QuickLft has the posts mounted on one side of the motor.

In theory, the PRL should be more rigid and therefore more accurate. In practice, I have found no difference between the two. They both hold the router securely and accurately.

I have never used the fine height indicators (the two little wheels with the etched numbers) on either of them. I set my router height using blocks or a square. I can't speak to their accuracy on either lift.

I have only one issue with the quick-lift right now, and that is that the motor can be hard to lift sometimes (remember, the 5625 is very heavy). I believe that is operator error on my part, but I haven't had a chance to pop it out to evenly tighten the motor mounting screws. I don't believe this is a problem with the lift.

My 5625 uses two wrenches to change bits. To do that, I need to pop the motor up pretty high. On the PRL, this is very tedious, even with the 16 pitch. The QuickLift, on the other hand, involves popping in an L-shaped bar, turning it 90 degrees to disengage the screw and lock it into the lift, and then pulling up to bring the motor up. Because of the ease in doing this, I ended up swapping spaces and put the QuickLift in the spot I most often use.

Of the two, I definitely prefer the QuickLift. The engineering on the PRL is nicer, but the QuickLift is much more user-friendly. In the end, you can't go wrong with either. Just be sure to pick up the full set of twist-lock rings when you order it.

If you join the Woodpecker's e-club mailing list, they do sometimes have sales on that. IIRC, you usually end up saving around $20, so it may not be worth the wait if you're hungry to get going now. :p

Pete

[Kevin Smith]

Pete,

Thanks for taking the time to respond to this post. It sounds like the Woodpecker quick-lift is definitely more convenient to use than the PRL. Your experiences and comments are pretty much in line with the review provided by newwoodworker.com.

I'm still having some difficulty in getting past what appears to be a significant difference in the overall quality of the lift. Maybe if I had the two side-by-side I wouldn't be as skeptical.

What did you think of Terry's idea about using the power driver to make adjustments. Have others out there opted for this as well?

[Brian Dormer]

I have a Dewalt 618 Router (with the 3 bases) and a Jesem Rout-R-Lift FX. All mounted in a Rockler top over a shop-built base. The router has lots of power. The setup is flexible - doesn't eat up too much floor space and can handle almost any project you can think of throwing at it. The router table does double duty as an outfeed table for the TS. Best of all - it didn't break the bank.

Probably my biggest gripes are that the "one wrench" collet change on the router is a bit problematic. The old 2 wrench system seems would seem to be "the better way". And the turret stop on the plunge base is a wiggly-wobbly piece of crap (just take it off).

bd

[Scott Brihn]

I been using the Woodpecker PRL (32tpi) for the last five years and have not found the cranking to be a nuisance. If I am in a situation where I am changing bits often during one session I will sometimes chuck a hex driver into my 1/2" cordless drill and "power" the lift. Do use some caution if you do this to avoid damaging the lift. I slow the driver way down as I approach the top limit.

In addition to set up blocks I do use the round fine indicators from time to time and have found them to be accurate.

As at least one previous poster mentioned if you join Woodpeckers email list they will from time to time offer a small savings. Additionally, my local Woodcraft carries this lift and it likely qualifies for the 15% "early bird" savings this Saturday.

[glenn bradley]

Pete,

Thanks for the detailed response. I run a 5625 and have been agonizing over the PRL v.s. QL issue. I, like others wonder; why, oh why did they put both posts on the same side for the QL when the PRL is such a good design. I hate it when folks 'almost' get it right.

However, hearing your testimony eases my concerns. As you know the Mil has to be raised ALL the way up to get to the collet nuts due to those cover plate screws. The hole without the insert ring installed is 3 9/16" according to Woodpecker. This is why I wanted something like the QL. Now, thanks to your input I feel more confident that there is not going to be a stability problem with that 'same side' post design.

P.s. Have you stressed the motor mounts and checked for deviation? Not that I plan to hang from my motor but I just can't get past the "same side" post thing just looking wrong.

Thanks!

P.p.s The engineer in me just gave a moment of serious thought about the linkage and additional points of slop and potential failure involved in making the PRL a quick lift chassis. My apologies for not thinking it through and just complaining. I believe Woopecker made the right choice (I would have tolerated two lift handles as an option though).

[Terry Kelly]

Yeah I do use the drill raise method with the drill slowly also.. I've used set up blocks as well and check with the dial indicators after word and found them to be quite accurate as well. I do regular PM duties on the PRL,cleaning and lubricating so everything flows well just like any other tool in the shop.

[Pete Brown]

Pete,
Thanks for the detailed response. I run a 5625 and have been agonizing over the PRL v.s. QL issue. I, like others wonder; why, oh why did they put both posts on the same side for the QL when the PRL is such a good design. I hate it when folks 'almost' get it right.


I was going to answer, but I see you did that yourself :)



However, hearing your testimony eases my concerns. As you know the Mil has to be raised ALL the way up to get to the collet nuts due to those cover plate screws. The hole without the insert ring installed is 3 9/16" according to Woodpecker. This is why I wanted something like the QL. Now, thanks to your input I feel more confident that there is not going to be a stability problem with that 'same side' post design.

P.s. Have you stressed the motor mounts and checked for deviation? Not that I plan to hang from my motor but I just can't get past the "same side" post thing just looking wrong.


No, I have not stressed it. I have run panel raising bits in it, and as well as lots and lots of tongue and groove work. I am also fairly rough with lifting the motor up when changing bits. I have been primarily cutting maple.

I also have not checked for deviation using any real measurement tools. For my CNC mill, I check everything with dial test indicators and generally go nuts, as precision is key. On a router table, I look to see if what comes out is a quality cut.

Honestly, I am sure I have more flex in the woodpeckers table it is mounted in, hanging over the right side of my saw, supported only by the Incra fence rails.

When you get that lift, get a set of offset wrenches from woodpeckers. You can use the regular wrenches that come with the milwaukee (mine rusted as soon as I took them out of the plastic), but using at least one offset wrench keeps you from sliding a wrench around the perimeter of the insert hole potentially dinging it up.

Pete

[Kevin Smith]

Thanks to everyone for their response to this post. I decided on the Woodpecker PRL and was able to take advantage of the 15% off sale at Woodcraft last weekend.

Needless to say, I'm anxious to get my table top re-cut and give the new lift a try.

Thanks again for the insights.