Sommerfeld "fix" .. .. anyone heard more ??

[Bob Wingard]

Back in Feb or so, we had a pretty lively discussion going about the Sommerfeld Tongue & Groove bit set. It was said that a "fix" would be available in 5-6 weeks .. .. .. has anybody here gotten any kind of fix, or even heard any more about it ?? ?? ??

I haven't heard anything myself, but I was thinking I might not get one since I was partly responsible for the ruckus.

Just wondering what the status was regarding this ?? ?? ??

[Mike Henderson]

There was some discussion of the fix in this thread (http://www.sawmillcreek.org/showthread.php?t=57474).

Mike

[Bob Wingard]

I know it came up again in the thread you referenced, but what I was asking is "Has anyone received the fix that was supposed to be just around the corner" ??

[Barry Anderson]

I don't know if anyone who had the early system received a "fix" but I bought the kit back in March and there were no problems with it. i.e. - it was "fixed".

Barry in WV

[Steve Bagi]

I got tired of waiting for the replacement bearing (4 weeks) and requested a new bit. They sent me a whole new set with a return shipping label for the old set. Good CS.

[Al Navas]

Back in Feb or so, we had a pretty lively discussion going about the Sommerfeld Tongue & Groove bit set. It was said that a "fix" would be available in 5-6 weeks .. .. .. has anybody here gotten any kind of fix, or even heard any more about it ?? ?? ??

I haven't heard anything myself, but I was thinking I might not get one since I was partly responsible for the ruckus.

Just wondering what the status was regarding this ?? ?? ??
Bob,

I was on the phone with Donna at Sommerfeld just this afternoon, and told her I was curious about the status of the fix, i.e., the new bearings.

She told me that she thought they are arriving (from overseas) "soon", but she would check and let me know. I suggest that people who bought the old sets check in with her, or do as Steve did and request a swap of the old bit set for the new set.


.

[Bob Wingard]

I've been in touch with Pat Reuter at Sommerfeld's as recently as yesterday .. .. .. I asked for a swapout and consider that a fair request since I've had this problem for over 2 years now and still don't have any resolution .. .. ..

Haven't heard back from her today, but maybe tomorrow. I hate giving up the CMT bits as I do believe they are a little higher overall quality than his new "Signature - made in China" sets, but I'd really like to get this behind me once and for all. She still seems to think I have unfairly put Marc in a bad light here .. .. .. you decide .. .. .. 2+ years of putting up with an obviously defective product .. .. .. I think the pressure is deserved.

[Rick Fouts]

I've tried to reach Donna or Pat at Sommerfeld's by e-mail about the replacement bearing's, but haven't gotten a response. That's been over a week ago. Like Bob, I've been using a set from CMT for longer than two years and now a set of their new bits that have the same problem. I think that if they can't get the right replacement bearing's, then a new set of bits is the only other thing to do.

[Jeff Wright]

. . . I've been using a set from CMT for longer than two years and now a set of their new bits that have the same problem.

Rick, when did you buy your NEW bits? I purchased a set about three weeks ago and they are fine . . . no issues with the tongue fitting completely into the groove. They appear to be a quality set of bits.

[Rick Fouts]

I bought them this past January at the Atlanta Woodworking Show. Actually I bought two sets and they are both like the CMT set. I'm vey pleased with the quality of the cut, but not the depth of cut.

[Bob Wingard]

Rick .. . FWIW, I just got an email from Pat responding to my request for a replacement set of bits .. .. ..

She says that the bearings will be shipped to them today from their supplier in Nevada, and they will ship them out as soon as they arrive .. .. hopefully, we'll see them in a week or so .. ..

[Rick Fouts]

Bob......Thanks for the info. I'll be watching the mailbox.

[Barry Londrigan]

Bob,

I am new to the knowledge discussed here concerning the problem with the T & G bit set. I have a CMT set that I purchased about two years ago and have not used very much due to still setting up shop. I understand from reading here that there must be some issue about the depth of cut. I was wondering if someone could direct me to a thread describing what the issue is since I figure with my bits being CMT and two years old.....I got the issue! Also...if the problem is only in the size of the bearing...isn't there someplace other than Sommerfeld to get the correct bearing? Thanks.

[Bob Wingard]

Barry .. .. .. start here & keep reading .. .. .. I agree with you, with a set of bits 2 years old, they probably have the dimensional error in them .. .. .. great timing though .. .. .. the customer service folks at Sommerfeld say they have come up with the necessary replacement parts to kind-of fix it. Contact them to get on the list for the part.


http://www.sawmillcreek.org/showthread.php?t=51750&highlight=sommerfeld

[Al Navas]

Rick .. . FWIW, I just got an email from Pat responding to my request for a replacement set of bits .. .. ..

She says that the bearings will be shipped to them today from their supplier in Nevada, and they will ship them out as soon as they arrive .. .. hopefully, we'll see them in a week or so .. ..

This IS good news, Bob! Please keep us posted. I am sure that Donna and Pat will be quite busy sending out the new bearings. I was pretty certain they would come through, and I AM very glad they did this time!

I look forward to future posts with updates, as the new bearings arrive at their proper destinations.


.

[Bob Wingard]

I'm glad too that we will finally be getting a workable solution. No big deal, but it does kinda hurt my feelings a bit that Pat accused me of "unjustly" putting them in a bad light, and telling me she has "someone on the Creek forums" that will counter any negative press I might give them.

Al .. .. you have probably read more about this entire fiasco than anyone on this forum, because you were concerned and open-minded, AND you took the time to understand the problem, along with the various possible solutions. Now, in you opinion, did you tthink anything I posted was biased, untrue, or unfounded ?? ?? ?? After 2+ years of disappointment, it looks like we will finally have a solution in hand. I'm very glad that this is (hopefully) coming to an end, but that end is over 2 years overdue.

It's kinda like the thief who gets caught, and has to make restitution .. .. .. the fact that he finally was forced to make up for his deed does not excuse the deed nor imply that it never happened.

I can only relate my experiences with Marc or any other vendor as I perceive them .. .. .. you, and everyone else, of course, are entitled to do likewise. I think if Marc is the super customer-oriented businessman his employees claim he is, he should, at the very least have apologized and kept us all abreast of the situation over time.

'nuff said .. .. we'll wait another week or so & see what shakes out !! !! !!

[Phil Thien]

I'm glad too that we will finally be getting a workable solution. No big deal, but it does kinda hurt my feelings a bit that Pat accused me of "unjustly" putting them in a bad light, and telling me she has "someone on the Creek forums" that will counter any negative press I might give them.


What I don't get, is how can it take two years to order-up some bearings? Are they that out of the ordinary that some bearing house couldn't supply them a little faster?

I don't have any CMT/Summerfield products.

[Al Navas]

I'm glad too that we will finally be getting a workable solution. No big deal, but it does kinda hurt my feelings a bit that Pat accused me of "unjustly" putting them in a bad light, and telling me she has "someone on the Creek forums" that will counter any negative press I might give them.
I believe that "someone" might me no one other than me, Bob. I have kept the dialog open with Pat, Donna, and with Marc, as I sensed that it WAS an important issue to resolve. The bits that I bought at the Kansas City show are superb and, as you know, dimensionally correct. In fact, I just finished building the first cabinet for LOML - it turned out great. As you predicted, I love the bit set! I know that you recall the dimensions I provided, and the bits WERE tight on the money.

Marc, Donna, and Pat have always been very receptive to my phone calls. I even called Marc when he was at home one time, and he gave me all the time in the world. Very kind of him to do so, especially as busy as he stays.

Maybe better contact with the clients who have had the bearing issue would have been the thing to do. But now that it is all water under the bridge, one can only look forward to the fix. That he HAS come up with the fix is important, as it will hopefully keep some, if not all, of his customers happy and may prevent defection to competitors. He offers superior bits, for sure.




Al .. .. you have probably read more about this entire fiasco than anyone on this forum, because you were concerned and open-minded, AND you took the time to understand the problem, along with the various possible solutions. Now, in you opinion, did you tthink anything I posted was biased, untrue, or unfounded ?? ?? ?? After 2+ years of disappointment, it looks like we will finally have a solution in hand. I'm very glad that this is (hopefully) coming to an end, but that end is over 2 years overdue.
No matter what opinions we express, there is always a chance that someone may misunderstand what we say, Bob.

I thought your position was always positive, and you posted so, stating things in a very factual way. I remember that MY initial reaction was one of surprise, and maybe misapprehension, as I did not understand where you were coming from. But I remember that you took the time to explain HOW the bearing issue results in a cabinet that has a wider back than the front of the cabinet. I appreciated your explanations.

At the same time, I can also sense how the Sommerfeld folks may have felt at the time, and how their reaction was quite human. But I given them a lot of credit for taking it on the chin, and finally coming out with a solution, albeit after several tries on you part and also on others' part.

I am certain they will be relieved to learn that they will have loyal customers. I KNOW you also like their router bits - I can sense that you are delighted to get the new bearings! I am truly happy about this outcome, and I am glad that I was able to talk it out with Marc at length.

I am not sure that my contribution made any difference, as I believe that he had already started the process to have the new bearings fabricated.




I can only relate my experiences with Marc or any other vendor as I perceive them .. .. .. you, and everyone else, of course, are entitled to do likewise. I think if Marc is the super customer-oriented businessman his employees claim he is, he should, at the very least have apologized and kept us all abreast of the situation over time.
I totally agree, Bob. I have always sensed that Marc truly cares about his customers, and always WANTS to deliver top-notch product. As I mentioned above, I am sure that he and his people wish that things would have happened a little differently - I cannot comment on this specifically, I can only speculate. I sense that relief is at hand on his side, and on the customers who bought the bits before the new ones were issued November 2006.

Do I sound like I am riding the fence on this issue? Maybe. But, as you know, I have tried to maintain a middle-of-the-road stance, as I had no bone to pick, because my bits WERE ok.

I can best summarize it as follows:

1. I am glad that a fix is at hand.

2. I am glad that I was able to participate in this dialog, as I have learned a LOT.

3. Thanks to you, the others who contributed to the dialog, and also Marc, Donna, and Pat, we can now hopefully look forward to continued good relations with Sommerfeld Tools.





'nuff said .. .. we'll wait another week or so & see what shakes out !! !! !!
Please, Bob, let us know when you receive your bearings. Thanks!

[Bob Wingard]

What I don't get, is how can it take two years to order-up some bearings? Are they that out of the ordinary that some bearing house couldn't supply them a little faster?


Phil .. .. .. it is absolutely exhorbitant having custom bearings fabricated .. .. ..bearing are nearly always made in standard incremental dimensions .. .. .. i.e. 7/8" .. 15/16" .. 1" .. or 10mm 12mm 15mm. That said, the bearings that came with this set had an o.d. of 1.125" - a standard dimension, for sure. Because the cutters were incorrectly sized in the design process, using the tongue-making bit from this set left a tongue that was about 1/32" short .. on a double-tongued piece i.e. rear nail rail that error added up to a total 1/16" +/-.

There are 3 ways in which to bring the relationship of cutter/bearing into proper numbers .. 1) Replace the cutters themselves with correctly dimensioned cutters such that a 1.250" bearing will actually leave a 1/4" tongue .. this is what the new sets look like .. 2) Replace the bearing with one that is 1.185" o.d. .. .. this oddball bearing would, in fact leave a proper 1/4" tongue .. .. this would probably be AT LEAST as expensive as option #1 because custom bearings are not easy to come by, especially in limited quantities .. 3) Replace the bearing with one of a standard, but smaller o.d. AND press on a sleeve or bushing that would alter the o.d. of the bearing to effectively make it 1.185".

If it were my business, I'd probably bite the bullet and use option #1 .. expensive for sure, but you only have one standard set of components to stock for future replacements. If option #2 or #3 are elected, it involves stocking a handful of these oddball parts forever. A few years down the road, a customer calls needing, say a replacement bearing. Which one will he get ?? The std 1.250" or the custom 1.185". Other factors come into play also if option #3 is chosen. A smaller bearing with a sleeve on it has fewer/smaller balls inside it, AND has more mass spinning on those balls/races. I have actually made such an arrangement, and, although it works, I am fairly certain that these bearings will wear out prematurely from the extra load placed on them. Another option is to use undersized bearings and run to a fence .. clumsy, but accurate. In the long run though, this is what almost everyone will end up doing after having the bits sharpened a few times. Once again, the fit between tongue & groove will be quite nice .. .. but not properly dimensioned, which is, of course the problem we've been facing for the past 2 years.

We don't, at this point know what Sommerfeld is going to send us. Any of the 3 options will make the sets at least dimensionally correct, therefore, usable. Again, if I were Marc, I would ask customers to at least try the "fix", and then, if still not satisfied, offer to replace the set with the newer correct parts. Pat sent me an e-mail recently saying that if a customer is in urgent need of a corrected bit set to complete a project at hand, they would send out the new set, no questions asked. I tried to take her up on that offer this week, and she balked, saying the new parts are due any day. No problem with that, but I would lilke to reserve the right to make the same request if, for some reason this fix has any problems.

Time will tell .. .. .. it's been quite a journey, and we're not quite there yet .. .. .. here's hoping everyone will be satisfied. But then, there's an old saying that "Some people wouldn't be happy if you hung them with a brand-new rope". Let's hope for happy !! !! !!

[Craig Coney]

If the gap is 1/32", why not just cut your boards a little light? If I recall, after speaking with Marc at a show, or afterwards on the phone, the gap was designed to capture excess glue. If you have two ends being connected, take off 1/16".

I think the set works well for its purpose and doesn't need any modification.

I've had the CMT set for a nearly 4 years now, and haven't had any issues. If I needed a tight fitting T&G joint for visibility, I just used my shoulder plane to sneak up on it, or used another method.

I don't have any affiliation with Sommerfield Tools, other than being a satisfied customer.

[Bob Wingard]

If the gap is 1/32", why not just cut your boards a little light? If I recall, after speaking with Marc at a show, or afterwards on the phone, the gap was designed to capture excess glue. If you have two ends being connected, take off 1/16".

So, you think that every component that requires one tongue should simply be shortened by "about 1/32"", and every piece that has two tongues should be shortened by 1/16" ?? Also, consider this .. a properly fitted 3-sided tongue has all 3 surfaces in long-grain to long-grain contact with it's grooved mate. If you ascribe to the "excess glue" theory, you've given up 1 surface for a net loss in joint strength of about 33%. Not good.


I think the set works well for its purpose and doesn't need any modification.

And, if you're content with tweaking every joint you make OR with inaccurate dimensions & an out-of-square condition on everything you make with this set, more power to you .. .. .. most of us seem to prefer planning our projects to a particular dimension and expecting our tools to be an aid in attaining this rather than a hindrance.


I've had the CMT set for a nearly 4 years now, and haven't had any issues. If I needed a tight fitting T&G joint for visibility, I just used my shoulder plane to sneak up on it, or used another method.

Truly amazing .. .. .. it's not been available to the public that long !! !! !!

[Barry Londrigan]

Bob,

I need help in understanding something here. I read your last post and you mentioned that these sets came with a bearing size of 1.125. Recall that I have a CMT set I purchase at a show two Januarys ago. I started into the process of fabricating a sleeve for a smaller bearing and I just thought I would measure mine. The bearing outside diameter on both bits is right close to 1.250. The diameter of the groove cutter is right close to 1.750 which makes sense.... then the diameter of the tongue cutter is around 1.694 (as best I could measure on several tries). This is where I see the problem for me in that it would cut a short tongue which would never bottom out in the groove (or to point more directly at the problem, it will leave too much shoulder which would then not allow the sides to come to square). This sounds consistent with what you are describing as the problem but I wanted to make sure on the dimensions.... and then...what size bearing are you starting out with to sleeve?

[Al Navas]

Barry,

While waiting for Bob to get back to you, please read this relevant thread (http://www.sawmillcreek.org/showthread.php?t=51750&highlight=sommerfeld+dimension) for the background on the discussion. He did a terrific job of describing to me the issue with the bearings.


.

[Bob Wingard]

Bob,

I need help in understanding something here. I read your last post and you mentioned that these sets came with a bearing size of 1.125.

Yeah Barry .. you are correct .. I made a typo .. .. .. the 1.125" SHOULD be 1.250" .. .. go my tongue caught behind my eye tooth and couldn't see what I was typing !! !! !!

I don't remember the O.D. of the smaller bearing that I sleeved, but it was one of the extra, unexplained bearings that came with the set .. .. if you got the CMT set .. .. I don't know if they ever came extra with the Sommerfeld yellow set. I'll check later and get back to you.

[Craig Coney]

So, you think that every component that requires one tongue should simply be shortened by "about 1/32"", and every piece that has two tongues should be shortened by 1/16" ?? Also, consider this .. a properly fitted 3-sided tongue has all 3 surfaces in long-grain to long-grain contact with it's grooved mate. If you ascribe to the "excess glue" theory, you've given up 1 surface for a net loss in joint strength of about 33%. Not good.

Perhaps we could have a magazine conduct a joint strength test on this theory.



And, if you're content with tweaking every joint you make OR with inaccurate dimensions & an out-of-square condition on everything you make with this set, more power to you .. .. .. most of us seem to prefer planning our projects to a particular dimension and expecting our tools to be an aid in attaining this rather than a hindrance.

I guess I am more aware of my tools and their characteristics than some others. I check how my tools perform, rather than presume. I rarely need to do what you mention above.



Truly amazing .. .. .. it's not been available to the public that long !! !! !!

Without making me go thru alot of receipts, maybe you could enlighten me on it's release date to the public.

Happy with my set and don't see a need for a new bearing in my case.

I'm not trying to stir the pot here Bob, but give another way to work around the issue you have brought forth. I seem to sense that you have taken some offense to my reply. None intended.

[Bob Wingard]

Craig .. .. .. if you honestly want or need to have a magazine tell you that a glued joint consisting of 2 surfaces, each 1/4" X any given length .. compared to another identically glued joint with 3 surfaces, each 1/4" X the same length is anything BUT approximately 2/3 as strong .. .. by all means petition every magazine in the country with that request and see if you have any takers. I've been laughed at for many things, but lack of simple fraction skills was not one of them.

I stand by my original assertion that if you use your tongue & groove bits, as advertised, and do not make any adjustments or corrections to the resulting joint, it absolutely cannot create an accurately dimensioned or square object. Most of the folks here who have read thru this whole thing see the nature of the problem when they look at the simple math. Even those who initially doubted or disagreed with me early on, have for the most part adopted this viewpoint.

There's really not much more to say .. .. . if you are happy making whatever you make with your set, and the flaws don't bother you, who am I to tell you otherwise?? The problem exists, pure & simple .. .. .. Mark Sommerfeld IS DOING SOMETHING to make it right .. .. .. his newer version of the same product reflects the correction of the unintentional dimensional error .. .. .. how you can deny it's existance is beyond me.

Believe me, I have not taken offense to your posting .. .. .. it does make me wonder just what point you are trying to make, but I take no offense.

[Craig Coney]

Bob,
My point is that if my cutter is cutting 1/32" off, I allow for that in overall design.

[Barry Londrigan]

I think that different people will have different expectations (of themselves and also of other people) of quality and getting what you are paying for. I myself (and Irene) would have to subscribe to the thought process of not having to make adjustments to something that CAN take care of (a step) the process in the first place. This is not to say that someone who does not mind doing so is wrong, I am just being critical of a process that can be refined. With the correct bit bearing, the extra provision for dimension can be avoided. I know I screw up enough the way it is in getting things right the first time (which is what I strive for) and that would just add confusion to the process for me.

This is much like the reasons that Einstein had seven suits in his closet that were all the same. He didn't have to clutter his mind with thinking about what he was going to wear. The point I make here is that his whole way of thinking was to "simplify" so as to be able to focus on progressing forward. I believe full-heartedly in this type of thinking. Automation and reducing redundancy is very important to me. Why make that mental measurement if you don't have to?

Understand that I am very rententive and am currently a Maintenance Supervisor. I have gone through many lean manufacturing initiatives and 5S is something I take to heart and as I am building my cabinet shop, I am trying to eliminate ANYthing that causes me to have to "do over" or anything that can be done faster.

With all of that being said, I suppose I cannot understand how this whole thing cropped up in the first place?? I mean, it is pretty simple math to see that the bearing size and cutter size on both bits would have to be the same. Unless I am missing something, that is how I see it. And I don't really care too much why but with the discussion here, I have asked myself how the different size tongue cutter came to be?? Why wasn't its O.D. 1.750? Thoughts came to my mind like someone saying "Hey...don't make them exactly the same...because maybe with different thicknesses in wood, maybe the tongue on some pieces will bottom out too soon and leave a gap in the joint at the shoulder". Or some other such scenario...could have just tooled up improperly..I don't know. I don't know enough about the history of how the discovery process went and bringing it to Sommerfeld attention went or any responses and so forth.

I am glad discovery did take place and now I can end up with something that will do what it is intended to do. I really like the whole idea of putting cabs together like this. It helps a rookie like me out.

It is to each his/her own. I think everybody can see that there is an issue...I personally would prefer to have it corrected so I don't have to make any adjustments. This allows me to focus on what I can screw up next!.....and then do over!

[Bob Wingard]

As a side note to this discussion .. .. .. at last year's IWF show, I contacted a fellow (Dave McCormack) who was tending the exhibit from CMT. I discussed the problem with him, and he went on & on about how significant that was, and that he was going to explain it all to the owner of the company .. just as soon as he got back from the exhibit floor. Three days later, I stopped by to ask what the status was, and was informed that the owner had not yet been notified .. .. .. draw your own conclusions there. Mr. McCormack again stated that this would be a top priority, just as soon as the show ended. Several weeks later, I posted a comment here being somewhat critical of CMT for not having committed to anything .. .. .. on 14 SEP 06, I received this message from him .. .. .. "I met you at the IWF show and the problem with the Sommerfeld bit is being addressed. The owner of the company has all the information and will evaluate the situation. The show was extremely busy and I did not make the time to discuss the issue until well after the show period had passed. If indeed there is a problem, I assure you we will take all the necessary steps to correct this matter."

To this day, nothing .. .. .. this weekend, I tried to find some reference to this bit set as sold by CMT and found nothing. It appears that THEIR fix is to discontinue the item, and hope the problem goes away. Now, as much as I've hammered Marc here for doing too little - too late, I have concerns as to what role CMT might have played in this scenario. Did they grind the cutters too shallow ?? or did they grind them to Marc's specs ?? ?? ?? Even if Marc DID spec them off by 0.070" on the OD,, one would think a company with as much expertise as CMT might have caught it and, at least questioned the numbers.

Now, when Marc went to China and wound up with the same dimensions on the new cutters .. .. .. that one kinda points to his specs being off. The Chinese don't care anything about parts working in unison .. .. .. just make everything to spec and pass q.c. and they're happy.

We'll probably never know exactly what transpired, but I'm still sitting herre, anxiously awaiting the arrival of my copy of the "fix"

[Mike Watts]

Talk about service. I have been following this thread with interest since I have had this set for about a year. I send an email to the general sommerfeld address at 3:16 today asking about the new bearing and got a reply at 4:31 that the bearings got in today and she (Pat) was going to send it out to me priority mail tomorrow. I have been impressed with their service in the past and this is just another confirmation of that impression.

[Bob Wingard]

Now THAT is GREAT NEWS !! !! !!

[Allen Bookout]

Rick, when did you buy your NEW bits? I purchased a set about three weeks ago and they are fine . . . no issues with the tongue fitting completely into the groove. They appear to be a quality set of bits.

I purchased their video and it seems like a really good system. The video was well done also. Jeff says that his set is fine and of high quality but I still wonder if all of the sets that they are shipping now are correct and of high quality.

My question is whether one should buy now or is this a wait and see thing?

[Al Navas]

...My question is whether one should buy now or is this a wait and see thing?
It is generally recognized that the bits sold since November 2006 are dimensionally correct, Allen.

Just in case you missed some of the earlier discussion in which this was covered in detail, please take a look at this portion of the thread (http://www.sawmillcreek.org/showthread.php?t=51750&page=2&highlight=sommerfeld+tongue+dimension). I bought my set at the Kansas City Woodworking Show; in this linked thread you will see that the consensus is that my set is dimensionally on-the-money.


.

[Bob Wingard]

Since the only people we've heard from with the later sets tell us they are on-the-money, there's not much reason to belive otherwise .. .. .. UNLESS .. .. .. you buy from a dealer who might still have old stock of CMT sets .. .. .. in that case, you're on your own.

[Aaron Beaver]

Since the only people we've heard from with the later sets tell us they are on-the-money, there's not much reason to belive otherwise .. .. .. UNLESS .. .. .. you buy from a dealer who might still have old stock of CMT sets .. .. .. in that case, you're on your own.

Is there anyway to tell when they were made?