Dowelmax or not?

[Ray Schafer]

OK guys. I am thinking about buying the dowelmax withthe 1/4 inch kit. I have bought all the stuff -- biscuit joiner, miller dowels, Kreg jig -- but I am thinking that with screws, the Kreg pocket jig and the dowelmax, I can do about everything I want. (Yes, I have te tablesaw, two routers and two router tables.)

Are there those of you who would talk me out of the $30 for the dowelmax? Are there those of you who would say "Go now and buy that tool!" Before I drop $350, I want to know what you have to say.

Thanks.
Ray

[Jason Beam]

Just my opinion: You've already got everything you need ... unless you need to buy gadgets.

I personally think the thing's overpriced. I think it's priced accurately, just that it's too much money for what it does. I have never had a need for a dowel to be placed such that a hole drilled in a 2x4 couldn't give me. I have plenty of gadgets, but this isn't going to be one of them.

I'd had this opinion for awhile now, but given that little patent spat that went on here awhile back, that pretty much sealed my decision once and for all.

[J. Z. Guest]

Ray, Unfortunately, I don't think there's any way to know if it is a good idea for you without buying one.

One way to try to guess if it is right for you is to analyze what you think is missing from the other quick forms of joinery. What don't you like about biscuits? What don't you like about pocket screw joinery? What don't you like about Miller Dowels? Does Dowelmax appear to address all these shortcomings?

If so, buy it. Be ready to use it for a project, and return it if it falls short of expectations. Did you read Matt Meiser's recent posts about Dowelmax? (you'll find them if you do a Title search on 'dowelmax') He returned his and didn't seem to get any hassle, so it seems like a no-risk situation.

I am a modern kind of woodworker. I'm not afraid to use power tools, so why should I be afraid of modern forms of joinery?

I think there will still be applications where dowels or pocket screws are not feasible, but I think they'll be few & far between.

There are a few things that convinced me to go for it, despite the huge price:

1) Nearly 100% of owners are extremely happy, despite the large expectations due to the price. They seem to get over the sticker shock.("Buy once, cry once. Buy cheap, buy twice.")

2) It is easy to get a properly-fitted joint. A mortise & tenon joint, the old standby, is very strong, but takes experience, patience, & practice to get them to fit properly. With Dowelmax, it seems hard to screw up, if you can follow simple directions.

3) I believe the design is well thought-out & original. Jim saw that doweling was a viable solution, but that it just hadn't been properly executed yet. He solved the problem with his own ingenuity, and did not cut corners on quality. This is the kind of person/company I like to support.

4) Lastly, I don't think a tool needs to have a motor to command a high price. It just needs to be of high quality and to address a real issue.

5) This article by WOOD magazine (http://woodstore.net/loto.html) also went a long way to convince me. If you're considering buying Dowelmax, this is a good comparison and will probably be worth the $3.25 download fee.

When it comes to strong joinery that is quick, precise, convenient, and invisible, it seems like there are only two options: Festool Domino or Dowelmax. I'm sure I'll post more later, after I build something with it.

Edit: I just re-read that article I linked to above. Dowelmax creates stronger joints than Domino, but is not quite as quick. M&T is still the strongest but slowest. Biscuits are not in the same league, and its suitable applications are narrower.

[Glenn Clabo]

Ray,
From my perspective...and mine only. I spend quite a bit of time researching tools that I want/need. I don't let other "opinions" change my mind unless there are solid facts provided to sway me. I respect peoples opinion only if the tool has been used and the decision to like or dislike it is based in reason...like Matt's. My intension was to give it a look and send it back if it was in anyway unsat.

My first impression of the DowelMax, as an old machinist, was WOW! I can't point to many tools that are more precisely made other than some planes I own.

Based on about 3 hours of use...literally making all of the joints it advertises it can make...I have never been more comfortable using a tool that does so much. Most have a steep learning curve and take a significant amount of attempts to make it work. This tool isn't in any way complicated and I was able to make joints the first time.

Why did I think...and now continue to believe it's worth the price? First...I have used other dowel jigs and frankly found them to be such a PITB I've trashed them. I haven't attempted to use dowel joinery for a very long time...and wondered why other people did. Second...although it is impressive looking it's not just another pretty tool. Precision tooling is NOT cheap and this tool is as well built as any tool I've used. That for me means it's accurate...repeatable...and simply extremely easy to use.

If it's a tool you want...that will do what you need AND in the price range you can swallow...I believe you won't be disappointed. I wasn't and after trying to not like it...I love it...and won't be sending it back.

[Matt Meiser]

Just so you know, if you do send it back, it cost me about $30 for USPS shipping to Canada which took over 2 weeks before delivery to DM was made. That was in addition to what I paid to get it to me in the first place. So the shipping on a return is not trivial. Most of my reasons for sending it back aren't that big of a deal. Really what it came down to is that I had talked myself out of a Domino and into a DM, so I had buyer's remorse from that aspect. Take a look at my Dowelmax/Domino threads and PM you if you still have questions.

[Phil Thien]

I appreciate the fine machining of the DowelMax, and I do not think it is overpriced for what it is. If you know anything about machining costs and the # of components included with their kit, you'll soon realize that they probably have a lower markup on their jigs than most woodworking tools you see.

That said, making your own doweling jig is not only possible but if you read any of the articles at the Fine Woodworking site you'll see that accomplished (just plain famous) woodworkers (like James Krenov) have made their own doweling jigs for decades. Learning to make precision jigs doesn't hurt, either, as the lessons can be easily applied to other woodworking endeavors.

There are jigs at other sites (like Fine Woodworking's) that can easily be copied and enhanced and work great.

[Charles Green]

I've never had one tool shock me as much as the DowelMax. Unless you are giving away your grocery money to buy it you won't regret it. I'm sure my son will be able to use this thing 40 years from now.

I look at it like a quality power tool like a cabinet saw. It is a lifetime purchase that will be used on almost every project I do. It gives me perfect quality joints with very little effort that are as strong as any other out there.

I don't get into the debate about which joint is stronger. From my experience the Dowels with modern glue are as strong as they need to be and then some. I also use pocket holes a lot as well where they are appropriate.

Try and find someone locally that has one to look at. I would be happy to show my dowelmax off and I'm sure others would as well.

[Ray Schafer]

Jeremy,

You make some great points.

I have decided to wait for one month before making the purchase of the DowelMax -- a cooling off period. During that time, I am going to make a jig for my DowelSimp'l to use it for a couple of projects. That will give me some experience with dowels which will help me see if I still really feel strongly about the purchase.

WRT to your (rhetorical) questions about the other techniques:

"What don't you like about biscuits? What don't you like about pocket screw joinery? What don't you like about Miller Dowels? Does Dowelmax appear to address all these shortcomings?"

I really like pocket screws in most cases. There are cases where I would like the alignment help that dowels can provide, and I want to be able to build furniture without fasteners in some cases -- especially as I move toward more "fine furniture" building instead of cabinets.

I like Miller Dowels especially for out door furniture where I don't want to use fasteners that can rust. I like the strength and simplicity of this joint. I sometimes want the dowels to be hidden.

I like to use biscuits for alignment help and when strength is not a big issue. I worry sometimes about the swelling and how it may affect the look of the surface. Dowels can be used just about anywhere that a biscuit can be used, and will in most cases be stronger.

In addition, I want the strenght of a M&T joint, which I can get close to (or in some opinions exceed) with dowels.

So ... I really do think that the DowelMax can give me ONE technique that I can use in nearly all cases. By using that method so much, I should be able to develop skill and speed in the use of the DowelMax.

[Art Mulder]

Ray,
Regarding the 1/4" add-on. that is one common regret I've heard from Dowelmax owners -- they regret not getting the 1/4" kit right away, since they could have saved on the separate shipping costs.


4) Lastly, I don't think a tool needs to have a motor to command a high price. It just needs to be of high quality and to address a real issue.

I agree. I'm puzzled as to why people complain about the price. I wonder if it is because it seems so elegantly simple once you see it demonstrated? I dunno.

I don't see too many people claiming that Lie Neilsen or Lee Valley bench planes -- which are also carefully designed, precisely machined, precision woodworking instruments, which perform a fairly limited set of procedures -- are overpriced. (I just checked, and ALL of the LVT bench planes are priced over $200 each.




I've only had mine a week, only made a few joints... But I was very impressed at how quickly and accurately it worked. I'm quite pleased.

...art

[Dan Barr]

I dont think you need it.

Stick to the Mortise and Tenon. One good Mortise chisel might just change your mind if you don't already have one. (and maybe a shoulder plane or 1/2" rabbet plane)

ciao,

dan

[Bill Huber]

Here are some things about the DowelMax that are really nice:

It is small and takes up very little room and I keep it in a drawer in a small box.

No power cords, I use a cordless drill so there are no cords around anywhere. I can take it anywhere and use it with the cordless drill.

It is easy to use, no settings to change and it will not get out of calibration. There are spacers to add but for the most part there is just put them in and go, its not like you have to do any set up with them. You do have to set the stop on the bit for the depth but that's noting.

It is very versatile and can be use in many different ways, on small thing with just one dowel to larger projects with 10 dowels a joint.

I have used it to make all my shop stuff, the TS stand, the router table stand, the planer stand, face frames on all my cabinets and the drawer fronts when I had to put to boards together to get one wide enough. I have had no problems with any of them and they all went together very well.

It is one tool that I just don't think I could give up. It is so easy to use and takes no time at all to learn to use it, like maybe 5 min. every time I use it I can't help but smile.

It is a fun tool to use if you know what I mean and when you put it all together the joint is wonderful.

[J. Z. Guest]

Well Ray, I thought I'd let you know I received my Dowelmax the other day.

I made my first couple of joints with it.

The first joint didn't work out, but only because I didn't have the nuts on the top part tightened.

On the second try, I got a perfect joint, just like Jim demonstrates in his videos. (http://www.dowelmax.com/video.htm)

The only difference was that it took me longer to drill the holes because the bit was a little oily and the chips were sticking to it. (but I prefer that to a rusty bit!)

Others have said that it exceeds their expectations. I can't honestly say that, because I have pretty high expectations for $280. :) I would say it meets my expectations. Furthermore, seeing the fit & finish of this, and the ingenius design, I'm happy that Jim & company got the money. The principles of this design has been under out noses for dozens of years, and finally, someone just nailed it. Speaking of fit & finish, it just can't be appreciated unless the tool is seen in person.


I've already started to build the nightstands with mortise & tenon joinery, and there is no turning back, since I've already cut the mortises in the legs. Too bad, because I'd already be done if I wasn't jerking around with M&T. On the other hand, I'm glad I learned how to do it the old-fashioned way first.

One thing that is taken for granted when talking about joint strength is that the fit is good. That is not something to be taken for granted with M&T. With Dowelmax, any rube can do it if he follows some simple directions.

I think the only time I won't be using it in the future is when I want to SHOW the joinery. (dovetails, box joints)

I think Jim or his son should get cracking and created a super good box joint jig. If they don't, I'll probably do it in about 10 years. ;)

[Ron Dunn]

Good thought, Jeremy ... I'd like to see how the Dowelmax guys might approach other methods of joinery, such as box joints and dovetails.

[Peter Quinn]

Question: Do you like working with wood or do you like making stuff quick that looks decent. Do you enjoy the process, or do you want to get it over with as quickly as possible then stand in awe of your creation? The answers to these questions should answer your question.

When I make a M&T I have made a mechanically sound joint by manipulating the wood in a time honored fasion that challenges my skill and invigorates my passion for wood working. The sensual feeling of coaxing a good joint is imeasurable. It cost only as much as I wish to spend making it as basic hand tools will do the work well.

When I drill dowel holes I feel like a jerk with a drill. It just feels cheap and dirty. I use dowels for production jobs where time is money, to make money... get it done and get paid. Still a mechanically sound joint I can safely warranty, just not pleasant.

When I am working wood for the love of it, I wouldn't touch dowels with a ten foot poll.

Do you need dowels?

[Heather Thompson]

Good thought, Jeremy ... I'd like to see how the Dowelmax guys might approach other methods of joinery, such as box joints and dovetails.

Ron,

Guess you never thought about us Gurls, I would go after them with my LN Saw, maybe the Two-Cherries chisels, possibly the Wonder Fence on my TSIII that sits on my PM66. Then of course, if Dowels were the right way to go, (College of the Redwoods), Mr Krenov seemed to like dowels, I might go that route. The thing with woodworking is that there is no single answer, only a journey. I suggest to allow others their own journey, give advice from your own, then shut up-we may all learn something.

Heather

Sorry, but I am in a nasty mood, have a doctor's apointment for this Monday that may not turn out well.

[Ron Dunn]

*lol*

Heather, I think your nasty mood is also affecting your reading for comprehension :)

By "Dowelmax guys" I meant the guys who MAKE Dowelmax ... I love my jig, and I'd be really interested to see how their design and production skills might be applied to other joinery jigs.

I've got nothing against Dowelmax users - I'm one - and I've got no interest in promoting the advantages of dowelling over any other joint, except insofar as it works for me.

Take a look for some of that jagged-edged tobacco with the funny smell. Roll yourself something useful, take a deep drag, and chill out ;)

Ron.

[Brian Penning]

Question: Do you like working with wood or do you like making stuff quick that looks decent. Do you enjoy the process, or do you want to get it over with as quickly as possible then stand in awe of your creation? The answers to these questions should answer your question.

When I make a M&T I have made a mechanically sound joint by manipulating the wood in a time honored fasion that challenges my skill and invigorates my passion for wood working. The sensual feeling of coaxing a good joint is imeasurable. It cost only as much as I wish to spend making it as basic hand tools will do the work well.

When I drill dowel holes I feel like a jerk with a drill. It just feels cheap and dirty. I use dowels for production jobs where time is money, to make money... get it done and get paid. Still a mechanically sound joint I can safely warranty, just not pleasant.

When I am working wood for the love of it, I wouldn't touch dowels with a ten foot poll.

Do you need dowels?

Peter»» Just curious as to how exactly do you make your mortises and tenons?

[Art Mulder]

Do you enjoy the process, or do you want to get it over with as quickly as possible then stand in awe of your creation? The answers to these questions should answer your question.

Peter,

What you've done here, IMHO, is put your finger on one of the core characteristics that usually separates hand-tool users from power tool users. That is, are you goal oriented, or process oriented?

I've seen this discussion go on for years on various forums. There are lots of folks who really get into the process. They really enjoy every step of the way, and don't mind spending lots of time on things. There are also lots of folks who are more goal oriented. They really, really, want to get to the end. They get most of their satisfaction once the project is complete.

Oh, it's not cut and dried. We're all unique, after all. I would bet that most of us like the process, even if we are goal oriented, or we wouldn't work wood. And those of us who are process oriented surely still like seeing the finished product. So there's no clear line to paint. Most of us fall somewhere along the line between the two extremes.

Is one better than the other? I would say of course not. It just reflects our wide diversity as woodworkers.

[Peter Quinn]

Ditto Art...I was not trying to put a value judgement on dowels, they are quick and accurate and strong but...neccessary? Hardly.

I personally take very little satisfaction from using dowels but do it for expediency. The sound, the smell, the feeling of wood yielding under my touch, all of that is lost with dowels. Even tennoning at the table saw has more feeling for me.

I cut my first mortises with a bit-n-brace in my grampa's shop (and believe me I'm not good at it!) tennons with a band saw. I use machines to make the tennons, sometimes use loose tennons, most stuff gets tuned in with a sholder plane. Mortises get cut with router or drill press, occasionally squared up by hand. I'm actually disapointed if I dont have to plane and chisel just a little! I pratice with hand saws like a terrior, slowly getting better but not there yet, but never giving up. To me, dowels are like giving up.

My original question/statement was to point out that two people can have very different perspectives on the dowel or not issue and both be right! Believe me, for me, I'm right. For some one else dowels may let them get to the part they enjoy quicker, or focus on design, or on finishing, or what ever. You need to ask yourself why you do this thing with wood and listen to your own answers.

[Mike Henderson]

A dowel is just another version of a loose tenon.

To me the problem with dowels is the question of whether you have enough face grain to face grain contact to have a strong joint. I think the reason dowels have a bad reputation is that people don't use enough of them to provide sufficient strength and the joint fails.

I would say to people who use dowels in a joint - "Compute the amount of face grain to face grain contact you actually have and compare that to a M&T joint". If it's close, go ahead and use the dowels. If not, question whether your joinery will be strong enough.

Mike

[Mike Henderson]

Let me do an example comparing a tenon on a chair to dowels, specifically the connection of the seat rail to the back stile. Let's take a worse case situation.

Let's assume that the seat rail is 2 1/2 inches wide and the back stile is 1 1/2 inches deep. This is very small, but let's assume I choose to use a tenon that's 2 inches wide and one inch deep. The glue surface area - face grain to face grain - will be 4 square inches.

Now, let's look at dowels and assume a 3/8 inch dowel, also going one inch into the back stile. The formula for the area of a cylinder is 2*pi*r*h. On a 3/8 inch dowel the area of the dowel sticking into the back stile is about 1.2 square inches. But we can only count half that because half of it faces into end grain and half faces face grain. So one dowel provides about 0.59 square inches of face grain to face grain contact.

So you'd need about seven dowels to equal the M&T joint. Most factory chairs have two dowels in that location. If 1/2 inch dowels were used, you'd need five of them to equal the M&T joint.

And this is a worse case stiuation for the M&T joint. Most chair rails are wider than 2 1/2 inches, many people would not put 1/4 inch space on the outside of the tenon, and they'd make the tenon longer than an inch.

So you can see why dowel joints fail compared to M&T joints - the glue area just isn't as large.

Mike

[J. Z. Guest]

In the July 2007 issue of WOOD magazine, they did a test, and here are the figures:

Shear test:
M&T - 1017 lbs.
Dowelmax - 609 lbs.
Beadlock - 541 lbs.
Domino - 464 lbs.
Biscuit - 187 lbs.

Pull-apart Test:
M&T - 2525 lbs.
Dowelmax - 1866 lbs.
Domino - 1486 lbs.
Beadlock - 1170 lbs.
Biscuits - 766 lbs.

I wish they had also done a racking test, as racking & shear is what counts with chairs. Jim Lindsay did such a test and found that the Dowelmax joints are the strongest in that regard. This isn't a surprise to me, since a multiple dowel joint has more surfaces against any given direction. We don't know 100% whether this test was unbiased or not, so I don't give it quite as much credit as the tests done by independent third parties, such as the magazines. (Jim's offer to the guy above to host him or fly out to a third party lab & witness the testing was pretty confidence-inspiring)

Their conclusion was that Domino was their preferred choice due to speed, accuracy, and dust collection, but that Dowelmax was another good option for 1/3 the money. The concluded that Beadlock wasn't fast enough to be in the same league and that biscuits are not strong enough for many applications. They also said that to build a rocking chair with Domino vs. M&T was an estimated time savings of 50%.

One thing I do know is that the strength of these joints depends on a good fit, and that a good fit is much more consistent & quick with a Dowelmax joint than with an M&T.

I do fully believe that a traditional M&T is stronger in many cases, and assuming a good fit. But I've done M&T, and a good fit is not to be taken for granted.

The main thing to note is that they considered any of these loose tenon joinery methods (except biscuits) to be "strong enough."

[Mike Henderson]

I haven't read the Wood article but I'd like to know what was being compared. That is, did all the joints have the same face grain to face grain surface area? If so, I would expect to see most of the joints have similar strength.

But to compare a two dowel joint on a chair to a M&T joint - I'd have a hard time believing they exhibited similar strength. Chair joints made with two dowels will almost always fail. M&T joints hold up a lot better.

Mike

[Mike Henderson]

Catastropic failure of a chair joint is not very meaningful. The most common type of failure is that the joint becomes loose. You grab the top of the chair and push and pull it, and the back of the chair moves in relation to the seat. Now, as far as I'm concerned, that joint has failed and has to be repaired.

I'll define an adequate chair joint as one that will not become loose on a kitchen chair, used daily by both adults and children, for a period of 25 years (an average lifespan of modern furniture).

Now, let me argue dowels. Suppose I used two toothpicks as dowels in the joint between the back stile and the seat rail. Would you expect that joint to fail within 25 years? Okay, suppose I use two 1/8" dowels - would you expect it to last 25 years?

Alright, let's move up to two 3/8" dowels - would you expect that to fail?

What size would you make the two dowels so that you would expect the joint to last?

I would expect you would have to choose a size that came close to the face grain to face grain surface area of a mortise and tenon joint. Or you would have to put in more dowels.

Mike

[Ron Dunn]

Dowelling nay-sayers always use the example of chairs. I venture to suggest that chairs are the least-commonly made item amongst woodworkers, and therefore largely irrelevant in the discussion of joining methods.

[Mike Henderson]

Dowelling nay-sayers always use the example of chairs. I venture to suggest that chairs are the least-commonly made item amongst woodworkers, and therefore largely irrelevant in the discussion of joining methods.
Well, there are probably a lot of examples that could be given. For example, the connection of an apron to the legs of a table. Any push to the side puts enormous stress on those joints and failure usually exhibits itself in a wobbly table.

Or would you just prefer to ignore any examples that do not suit your pre-existing beliefs?

Mike

[I'll also point out that I'm not opposed to using dowels. What I am opposed to is not using them properly - expecting two 3/8" dowels to perform as well as a M&T joint, for example. For certain applications, dowels are the best solution. The builder just has to be aware of how and where to use them and to use them in the proper applications.]

[Robert Meyer]

Question: Do you like working with wood or do you like making stuff quick that looks decent. Do you enjoy the process, or do you want to get it over with as quickly as possible then stand in awe of your creation? The answers to these questions should answer your question.

When I make a M&T I have made a mechanically sound joint by manipulating the wood in a time honored fasion that challenges my skill and invigorates my passion for wood working. The sensual feeling of coaxing a good joint is imeasurable. It cost only as much as I wish to spend making it as basic hand tools will do the work well.

When I drill dowel holes I feel like a jerk with a drill. It just feels cheap and dirty. I use dowels for production jobs where time is money, to make money... get it done and get paid. Still a mechanically sound joint I can safely warranty, just not pleasant.

When I am working wood for the love of it, I wouldn't touch dowels with a ten foot poll.

Do you need dowels?
Peter, just out of curiosity, would you feel cheapened if you used a loose tenon in the mortise?

[Ron Dunn]

Mike, it is not a case of pre-existing beliefs, just pointing out that the most-quoted objection to dowels is around chair construction, which is probably the least-used joint in hobbyist woodworking.

To your example of table aprons, what would you consider to be the typical apron size? In my experience it would be somewhere between 70-100mm (around3-4"). Using Dowelmax - the subject of this thread - you'd have four or five 10mm*50mm dowels in a joint of that size.

For a novice woodworker, the chances of a well fitting M&T apron joint are very low. They'll have non-parallel sides; an angled tenon; poor cheek alignment; bad gluing surfaces; perhaps all of the above. None of my M&T joints ever approached the quality of my dowelled joints, which is why *I* chose another joining method.

PERHAPS a perfectly made M&T is stronger than a dowelled joint in a typical racking application. But for sure, a well dowelled joint (easy with the right jig) is far stronger and more reliable than a poorly constructed M&T.

[Mike Henderson]

Mike, it is not a case of pre-existing beliefs, just pointing out that the most-quoted objection to dowels is around chair construction, which is probably the least-used joint in hobbyist woodworking.

To your example of table aprons, what would you consider to be the typical apron size? In my experience it would be somewhere between 70-100mm (around3-4"). Using Dowelmax - the subject of this thread - you'd have four or five 10mm*50mm dowels in a joint of that size.

For a novice woodworker, the chances of a well fitting M&T apron joint are very low. They'll have non-parallel sides; an angled tenon; poor cheek alignment; bad gluing surfaces; perhaps all of the above. None of my M&T joints ever approached the quality of my dowelled joints, which is why *I* chose another joining method.

PERHAPS a perfectly made M&T is stronger than a dowelled joint in a typical racking application. But for sure, a well dowelled joint (easy with the right jig) is far stronger and more reliable than a poorly constructed M&T.
If you check my previous posts, you'll see that what I advocated is that the woodworker compute the amount of face grain to face grain contact and choose the number of dowels that gives an amount approximately the same as a M&T joint.

M&T joints are not that difficult to make, especially with power tools. I cut the mortise with a slot mortiser and the tenon on the table saw. I usually cut the tenon a bit fat and trim with a LV shoulder plane. If the stock is square to begin with, the fit is very good, with the shoulders tight. If I don't have access to the slot mortiser, I drill out the mortise and clean it with a chisel. Perhaps the best thing for a novice woodworker to do would be to get some instruction on M&T joinery rather than ignoring the joint and using dowels as a crutch.

But in any case, the essence of my posts is to think before using dowels in traditional M&T joinery and make sure you get an appropriate face grain to face grain surface area.

Mike

[Greg Funk]

But in any case, the essence of my posts is to think before using dowels in traditional M&T joinery and make sure you get an appropriate face grain to face grain surface area.
Mike
Mike,

Based on the published test results the ratio of M&T to dowel joint strength is not proportional to the face grain surface area. According to the Wood magazine test a 1 3/4 x 1" M&T had a pull-apart strength of 2500 vs 2000lbs for a two dowel joint.

The problem is that in either case the joint generally doesn't fail, rather the surrounding wood fails. Cutting a mortise significantly weakens the surrounding wood. While dowels don't have as much surface area they also have less of an impact on the surrounding wood.

Greg

[Mike Henderson]

Mike,

Based on the published test results the ratio of M&T to dowel joint strength is not proportional to the face grain surface area. According to the Wood magazine test a 1 3/4 x 1" M&T had a pull-apart strength of 2500 vs 2000lbs for a two dowel joint.

The problem is that in either case the joint generally doesn't fail, rather the surrounding wood fails. Cutting a mortise significantly weakens the surrounding wood. While dowels don't have as much surface area they also have less of an impact on the surrounding wood.

Greg
The problem, as I noted earlier, is not that the joint fails catastrophically, but that it becomes loose over time, especially in racking situations like a chair or a table. I maintain that the looseness comes from failure of the glued surface area (since neither the dowel nor the overlying wood is broken). I would also maintain that the probability of the glue failing is porportional to the amount of face grain to face grain surface area. Unless you put in enough dowels to get sufficient face grain glue surface area the joint will probably fail, long term.

It seems difficult to come to any other conclusion. Can you explain why doweled chair joints fail and nether the dowel nor the wood is broken (but the joint is loose)?

Mike

[Ron Dunn]

Greg, there's one slightly contrary point to add to the "weakness" argument ... in my first few joints with Dowelmax and 10mm dowels I had a few blow-outs in the end-grain of a corner joint - the vertical rail in a typical panel frame.

The lesson I learned, when using straight- and open-grained wood like Victorian Ash (roughly similar to US white oak) was to leave a bigger margin at the end of a rail. This meant using 6mm dowels, or not drilling the dowel, closest to the end of the rail.

[Greg Funk]

It seems difficult to come to any other conclusion. Can you explain why doweled chair joints fail and nether the dowel nor the wood is broken (but the joint is loose)?

Mike
The only possible explanations I could offer for failed joints whether they were M&T or doweled would be:
1. Glue failure. Chairs built 25 yrs ago may have been built with inferior glue.
2. Failure due to multiple expansion/contraction cycles occuring with changes in moisture content. Perhaps if the dowels were made with a softer or different wood they might compress more.

I don't know the proportion of chairs made with dowels vs M&T but perhaps you see more failed dowel joints simply because the joint was more commonly used in the past.

I believe that historically M&T joints were subject to the same types of failure you have seen with dowels. That is why you see many old M&T joints made with pins. That way if the glue failed there would still be a mechanical connection.

Greg

[Mike Henderson]

The only possible explanations I could offer for failed joints whether they were M&T or doweled would be:
1. Glue failure. Chairs built 25 yrs ago may have been built with inferior glue.
2. Failure due to multiple expansion/contraction cycles occuring with changes in moisture content. Perhaps if the dowels were made with a softer or different wood they might compress more.

I don't know the proportion of chairs made with dowels vs M&T but perhaps you see more failed dowel joints simply because the joint was more commonly used in the past.

I believe that historically M&T joints were subject to the same types of failure you have seen with dowels. That is why you see many old M&T joints made with pins. That way if the glue failed there would still be a mechanical connection.

Greg
I agree with you. The point I've been trying to make is that you can't replace a M&T joint with two 3/8" dowels and expect to get the same performance (lifetime).

Let's take glue failure. The failure is likely to be slow. Having more glue surface area provides a longer life because it takes longer for enough glue to fail that the joint comes loose. And the glue 25 years ago was pretty good. Urea formaldehyde glue was developed prior to WWII and it is very good glue with a long lifetime. You probably have to go back to hide glue to find inferior glue (and the neanders will disagree with that).

With the expansion/contraction cause of failure, the same rational applies. The more surface area, the more reservoir of strength to keep the joint together.

As I said earlier, I have nothing against dowels. But if you're going to use them, use enough of them.

Mike

[Cary Swoveland]

I just wanted to add a comment concerning the pricing of the Dowelmax. Over the last few years I have read many posts to this group and to others that express the opinion that the Dowelmax is "overpriced".

I really don't know what this means. Does it mean that the Dowelmax company is making obsene profits? Or is it suggesting that they could be a lot more efficient, and thereby reduce their costs and be able to sell it for a lot less? Or perhaps it simply means that, for them, the utility of the product is not great enough to justify the price.

I understand that, for the first few years of the company's existence, they lost money on every sale, which is par for the course for start-ups. They contracted out the production and the machining was very costly. That had to do with the materials used and the tolerances that were demanded by the CEO/inventor/chief bottle washer, Jim Lindsay. On top of that were all the other costs of running a business and promoting a new product. I don't know if the company has turned the corner yet, or brought production in-house, but I doubt very much if it is now in a position to extract monopolistic rents from the market.

When I look at the many beautiful pieces that comprise the Dowelmax, I see the costs, and I also see value.

I expect they could reduce costs by producing off-shore, but if that resulted in any compromise in quality, would it be a good business decision? Personally, I would have no interest in the Dowelmax if joints did not feel perfectly flush, if dowels were the least bit loose in their sockets, or if I could not count on perfect spacing across the span of boards being mated.

Cary

[J. Z. Guest]

I haven't read the Wood article but I'd like to know what was being compared. That is, did all the joints have the same face grain to face grain surface area? If so, I would expect to see most of the joints have similar strength.

Mike, I don't remember. I'll see what details they had when I get home. I recall that they built the joints as they thought most users would do. Mortise & Tenon had the typical proportions, with dowels, they used as many as would reasonably fit, etc.


But to compare a two dowel joint on a chair to a M&T joint - I'd have a hard time believing they exhibited similar strength.
Well, the figures are above for pull-apart and shear tests. What you consider similar is up to you I guess. When you say: "...on a chair..." I assume you're talking about shear & racking rather than pull-apart.


Chair joints made with two dowels will almost always fail. M&T joints hold up a lot better.
Just out of curiosity, what are you basing this on? Probably older, falling-apart chairs. You've found that the doweled ones fall apart and the M&T ones don't? Could it be that (as was mentioned earlier in this thread) that older glues, mis-alignment/bad fit and non-expanding dowels are to blame? We won't know for about another 20 years I guess. It could also be that doweled chairs were the price leaders, and time was saved in joinery as well as other areas whereas the M&T ones were top-of-the-line?

I would like to hear from Jim some details of the joints compared in his strength videos. For instance, was the M&T joint he tested of typical proportions, or did it only extend down 3/4", to be on par with a 1-1/2" dowel? What glue was used? It was good to see the testing, but it really means much more if all the specs are given.

I did a bunch of doweling last night with Dowelmax. One nice thing I hadn't thought of when researching & purchasing is that dowels work equally well on plywood and other "modern" woods, whereas M&T doesn't make as much sense in those areas. I was applying 3/4" solid wood edging to some plywood shelves.

[Mike Henderson]

On another thread Greg Funk posted the name of this article - FWW #21 "The Dowel Joint. Why round tenons fall out of round holes, and the elastomer compromise" by R. Bruce Hoadley. It's a very good article and explains why I'm seeing what I do, which is dowel joints coming loose over time (and not that they break).

Read the article and you'll see why strength testing of a fresh joint is really not meaningful.

Mike

[J. Z. Guest]

We are both referring to articles the other guy hasn't read. :D The WOOD article is availble for purchase on www.woodmagazine.com (http://www.woodmagazine.com).

Can I buy that FWW article online somewhere without having to subscribe?

Edit: Here's the direct link: http://woodstore.net/loto.html

[Mike Henderson]

To summarize that Hoadley article, he says that expansion and contraction due to humidity changes causes the actual wood to fail and that's why the dowel comes loose. The wood that fails is in the hole, and is the wood in contact with the glue. So, according to him, the glue doesn't actually fail but the layer of wood in contact with the glue fails and the dowel becomes loose. He gives some suggestions for minimizing the effect, but nothing stops it. Even if there was some "perfect" glue, the joint would still become loose.

That certainly has been my experience with doweled joints under high stress (such as chairs and tables). Nothing breaks (that you can see) but the joint becomes loose after some years.

So comparing joint strength of fresh joints will not tell you how the joint will hold up long term. A better process would be to expose the joints to humidity cycling prior to the strength test. In other words, "age" the joint prior to testing.

Mike

[Joe Vincent]

. . . The wood that fails is in the hole, and is the wood in contact with the glue. So, according to him, the glue doesn't actually fail but the layer of wood in contact with the glue fails and the dowel becomes loose. . . .
Mike

But what is it about dowels that makes that layer of wood fail in such a way that the corresponding layer of wood in other types of joints would not fail under the same conditions? What about non-round loose tenons?

[Chris Padilla]

Mike,

So why do M&T joints hold up better over dowels according to what you read from Mr. Hoadley? M&T would be subject to the same conditions. Is it as simple as glue surface area?

[Mike Henderson]

Mike,

So why do M&T joints hold up better over dowels according to what you read from Mr. Hoadley? M&T would be subject to the same conditions. Is it as simple as glue surface area?
It's not clear whether Hoadley thinks M&T joints hold up better - at least to my reading of the paper. He really doesn't address M&T joints in the paper - just dowel joints.

I've seen a lot of chairs with failed dowel joints but that could be because that's the way chairs were made in factories - they just didn't make chairs with M&T joints.

Now, this is my opinion so take it for what its worth. I think M&T joints *might* be better just because there's more surface area (as you noted). According to Hoadley, the wood fails but does so over time. The same may occur with an M&T joint but because of the greater surface area, it takes longer for the joint to fail. But that's a guess on my part.

The other thing I think about is that our woodworking ancestors were smart, pragmatic people. They tried things and noted what worked and what didn't. They had the ability to drill holes and make dowels but they made fine furniture with M&T joints. My guess is that they found that M&T joints held up better - but that's just another guess. If dowels held up well and were faster to make, they would have used them because they were in business and had to turn furniture out quickly. And they certainly were aware of dowel joints.

Mike

[Chris Padilla]

Another strength of the M&T is that half of the joint is made from "continuous non-glued, non-floating" wood.

Dowels are loose in both piece of wood to be joined...just like a biscuit...or a domino...and so are doubly reliant upon glue for fixing.

I also don't see much about what a loose tenon is made of. What wood is it? We *know* what comprises the wood in a M&T joint...wouldn't that be as important for a loose tenon joint? I mean, you wouldn't use a domino or dowel or biscuit made of balsa wood!

[Mike Henderson]

Another strength of the M&T is that half of the joint is made from "continuous non-glued, non-floating" wood.

Dowels are loose in both piece of wood to be joined...just like a biscuit...or a domino...and so are doubly reliant upon glue for fixing.
My experience is that the joint fails where the long axis of the woods are at right angles to each other. So on a chair, the joint fails in the back stile and not in the seat rail. Of course, the grain to grain contact in the seat rail is all face grain, while the grain to grain contact in the back stile is part face grain and part end grain. For a round loose tenon (a dowel) it's half and half.

If I use a dowel or loose tenon, I try to make it out of the same wood as the rest of the joint so that it matches the expansion characteristics - I don't know if that makes a better joint or not, but I feel better about it.:)

Mike

[Glen Gunderson]

I just wanted to add a comment concerning the pricing of the Dowelmax. Over the last few years I have read many posts to this group and to others that express the opinion that the Dowelmax is "overpriced".

I really don't know what this means. Does it mean that the Dowelmax company is making obsene profits? Or is it suggesting that they could be a lot more efficient, and thereby reduce their costs and be able to sell it for a lot less? Or perhaps it simply means that, for them, the utility of the product is not great enough to justify the price.

I understand that, for the first few years of the company's existence, they lost money on every sale, which is par for the course for start-ups. They contracted out the production and the machining was very costly. That had to do with the materials used and the tolerances that were demanded by the CEO/inventor/chief bottle washer, Jim Lindsay. On top of that were all the other costs of running a business and promoting a new product. I don't know if the company has turned the corner yet, or brought production in-house, but I doubt very much if it is now in a position to extract monopolistic rents from the market.

When I look at the many beautiful pieces that comprise the Dowelmax, I see the costs, and I also see value.

I expect they could reduce costs by producing off-shore, but if that resulted in any compromise in quality, would it be a good business decision? Personally, I would have no interest in the Dowelmax if joints did not feel perfectly flush, if dowels were the least bit loose in their sockets, or if I could not count on perfect spacing across the span of boards being mated.

Cary

I don't believe that people are saying that Dowelmax has a huge profit margin on each one, but rather that the Dowelmax is simply too expensive for them to justify spending on a doweling jig. Value is a very personal thing, so I'm not surprised that many people see little value in a $300 doweling jig, no matter how well made it is.

Much like other high end tools (Festool, Minimax, Felder, etc.) Dowelmax is are worth its price tag to some, but not others. When a product is several times more expensive than its competition, there will always be question about its value, not matter how much better it is.

[Ron Dunn]

I don't have the article in front of me, but to my recollection the Hoadley article has nothing to do with Dowelmax-style dowels.

From memory, the article is talking about the tapered dowels on the end of turned spindles and other chair parts.

I'm happy to be corrected on this - my memory is aging - but I remember laughing at how often this article was mis-used.

[Mike Henderson]

I don't have the article in front of me, but to my recollection the Hoadley article has nothing to do with Dowelmax-style dowels.

From memory, the article is talking about the tapered dowels on the end of turned spindles and other chair parts.

I'm happy to be corrected on this - my memory is aging - but I remember laughing at how often this article was mis-used.
As part of the article Hoadley talked about Windsor chairs and the "dowels" on the end of the rungs (not tapered dowels) but I read the article as a general analysis of dowel joints and the problems of keeping them fastened.

In any case, we have a real world "situation" of dowel joints failing over time (by coming loose) and Hoadley's explanation of why makes sense.

But I'm open to alternate reasoning.

Mike

[Art Mulder]

On another thread Greg Funk posted the name of this article - FWW #21 "The Dowel Joint. Why round tenons fall out of round holes, and the elastomer compromise" by R. Bruce Hoadley. It's a very good article and explains why I'm seeing what I do, which is dowel joints coming loose over time.

I have not read this article. However, I have seen it referenced before in discussions like this one. I have also read a few very good comments about that article that I think bear repeating:

First, this is FWW #21... that is a 25 year old article or thereabouts. There are two things that are different now. One is that we have better glues. The other is that the dowels we use now are compressed, so they expand after being dampened by the glue. So they should "lock" into the joints. (this is not a direct quote, but the gist of the argument I've read in relation to that article, and it makes sense to me.)

The same is also true of biscuits and dominos of course. Those are also made of compressed wood.

I agree that the true test is time and use. How does a Dowel (or biscuit, or domino) stand up in a certain joint over time and with regular use? Is that even possible to test? How? And has anyone done that for biscuits or dominos or moder dowels? And with modern glues?

And in some ways, that is true for almost all these reports that talk about joints that fail on 30-50 year old pieces; All of those are made with glue that is inferior, at least based on what I've read in ww'ing magazines, to what is available today.

Oh, I still would not argue that a dowel may not be the best joint for a chair. But I bet it is good enough for many other joints.

I'm just a bit skeptical of all the various reports and articles that try to tell us what is the "best" joining method. All the tests that I've seen usually involve destructively testing a joint, and then telling us at which point it failed. That's nice and all, but it doesn't tell us how strong is strong enough!

For example, I saw a report last year where various joints were tested, with these results (this is when the joint failed):

Biscuit 250lbs
Pocket Holes 420lbs
Traditional tenon 480lbs
Domino 540lbs
Leigh FMT 680lbs
Dowel 890lbs
(oh and the report was on the canadianwoodworking forum, so the TOS prevents me from putting in a link, if you go there and search on " What is stronger - the results") you'll find the discussion.

So, the biscuit joint failed at 250 lbs. So it's the worst joining method and we should never use it, right? ... right?

Let's make an imaginary project -- say a bench. Four legs, with biscuits holding all the joints. Now you've got 8 biscuit joints in there. (two side-to-side crosspieces with a biscuit at each end, and two front-to-back crosspieces with a biscuit at each end.) So, each of those joints will fail at 250lbs. But how much total weight could the seat of that bench now support?? I would guess that it does NOT work out to 8x250, but I'm pretty sure that it is considerably more than 250lbs. Even if that was just 500lbs, that is still plenty strong for the load that a bench usually supports.

Your average adult male weighs 200-250lbs, so this bench likely is plenty strong enough to give years of service.

Would I build a bench using biscuits? Probably not. My point is more that we need to know what real world loads are... I would not at all be surprised to find that ALL of those joining methods are strong enough for many situations.

...art

[Mike Henderson]

While glues have changed in the last 25 years, we had excellent glues back then. And if glue was a problem, we'd see all kind of joints failing, not just certain ones.

Hoadley's article makes a lot of sense because it explains why certain joints fail even if the glue functions properly.

I know nothing about the effect of compressed dowels and loose tenons and they may make some difference. It'd be interesting to see some data on humidity cycling (aging) of joints with expansion dowels/loose tenons/etc.

I think one thing that comes through loud and clear is that strength testing of fresh joints is not very meaningful and gives little insight into the long term survivability of the joint.

Mike

[J. Z. Guest]

Mike, I found and read the Hoadly article. Interesting.

It seems to apply to all mortise & tenon joints, not just round ones known as dowel joints. (although he used round for all his examples.)

The last part of it, where he talks about gluing with silicone RTV was VERY intersting. It is something I hadn't considered. The idea of accepting a weaker initial joint for something that is more resistant to humidity cycles is quite good.

His bit about minimizing the effect of moisture change by sealing the project (esp. end grain like feet) is also something I suspected made a huge difference.

The bottom line is that I will be using polyurethane glue and polyurethane finish on anything that will take a lot of stress in the joints. Reduce the moisture variance and use an adhesive that isn't so darned stiff as white or yellow glue, and it should be good.

It's good enough for our favorite rocking chair maker!

[Jim Lindsay]

Thanks to everybody for the interesting replies on this thread.

The other thing the 30 year old Hoadley article does not take into consideration is the number, density and accuracy (or tightness of gap free fit) of high quality compressed dowels that you can place into a typical joint using the Dowelmax. For a chair joint, we would use a row of 4 x 2 inch dowels minimum, preferably 5, or possibly a double row of 4 or 6.

As mentioned before we have overtight, dry fitted pieces in our workshop that have been there for 10 years that we cannot get apart without hammering.

We have done the strength tests on fresh joints and we think they are significant. Prior to the tests, some people would not believe that the multiple dowel joint was as strong as the mortise and tenon joint. It surprised even us that it was stronger. I wish we had done it sooner.

For the longevity issue, I think if its better connected to begin with, it will be better connected to end up with. I think the dowel joints that are failing are of poor quality and underconstructed to begin with.

The dowel joint used in the Wood article, to us was again underconstructed. They compare 2 dowels to a 1-3/4 inch tenon in a 2 inch workpiece which skews the result in favour of the M&T. We would have preferred a 2-1/8 workpiece with 3 dowels.

On the subject of old dowel joints, I have an 8 foot long bookcase that I built with dowels, but without the Dowelmax in 1990. It's long, heavy and flexes when you carry it. It has been in 5 different apartments, moved 9 times and it is still perfectly intact. I'll post some pictures of it when I get a chance.

Mike Lindsay.
http://www.dowelmax.com

[Ray Schafer]

I am going to pull the trigger on this tool in the morning. After much thought, and much reading this and other threads, I am convinced that I can do everything that I want to do with the Dowelmax. I will report on my experience after I get the tool.

Ray