Dowel Max ????

[Dave Lehnert]

I have read the great reviews of the Dowel Max. I ordered the DVD and received it the other day. After looking at the video I was left with the feeling why is this jig so special. I fail to see the difference between it and say a $39 one for Grizzly. Looks to be very well made and it should for just less than $300. I know I am missing something because of the reviews.

[Charles Green]

If the DVD didn't sell you or all the online reviews and comments what else would you want to hear?

I think it is the best thing since sliced bread but it may not be for everybody.

The cheaper dowel jigs just don't work as well. I've tried some before. You would have to use both to appreciate the Dowelmax as much.

[J. Z. Guest]

Dave, first, consider entering your geographic location in your profile.

If a Dowelmax owner is near you, I bet he would be willing to demo it and let you have a look at it.

It seems like Dowelmax owners go through phases:

1) "Oh, a dowel jig. It looks nice, gets great reviews."
2) "I wonder how much it costs? *click*"
3) "Holy crap! Nearly $300 for a dowel jig?! No way.
4) "Maybe I should go to dowelmax.com and read up on it..." *click*
5) "Looks nice. Looks easy."
6) "Maybe I should research the hell out of this. I'll go read every review I can find." *click-click-click-click...*
7) "OK, I've read all the reviews. They're all good. I'm still having a problem with the price. I'll go ask my buddies about it on the forum." *click*
8) "Wow, those guys all agree it is great too."
9) <thinks on it for a while>
10) <has faith, pulls trigger>
11) "Wow, this thing is great!"

That's how it worked with me, at least. It is a lot of darned money. To me it doesn't exceed expectations, but it meets expectations, and that is saying a lot, for that kind of money.

The skinny is that it works just as it should, and no other dowel jig really does. The machining & parts quality are top notch. Customer service is top notch.

Have you done a search on "dowelmax" in thread titles for this forum? Lately, we've been getting about one new thread per week on it. Most of it is rehashing what has already been said. But maybe you just want confirmation before you drop that kind of money. Understandable.

It seems to me like the modern way to do M&T joinery.

[Mark Walker]

Jeremy, you hit those phases dead on for me. I went through #10 this afternoon. Now I anxiously await the chocolate truck...

[Art Mann]

Dowel joints have been my preference for a lot of applications for 30 years of woodworking. Over that time period, I have owned maybe a dozen different doweling jigs of various kinds. I can say without hesitation that the Dowelmax is a bargain compared to the $39 self centering alternatives or any other kind because it does exactly what it is supposed to with extreme ease and superb accuracy. None of the others ever quite lived up to my expectations. Since getting the Dowelmax, I have lost all desire for the Festool Domino.

[gary Zimmel]

I am between #10 and #11.

After seeing and reading all the posts here over the last while I pulled the trigger and ordered one. I was plesently surprised it only took 3 days to get to me. Haven't had time to give it a test drive but it sure looks pretty.

I love the thread on some of the storage units for the dowlmaxes.

Thanks to everyone who has given this tool the thumbs up. It made it easy for me to make up my mind.

[Phil Thien]

I made a variation of a Fine Woodworking jig:

http://www.cgallery.com/jpthien/dj.htm

Works great.

[Ray Schafer]

where did you get the bushings?

[Phil Thien]

where did you get the bushings?

Hardware store. They're just standard steel spacers.

[Will Blick]

Jeremy, your post was nothing short of hilarious! part of what makes it so funny is, just how true it is....

Its a unique product, that performs its task flawlessly, and sometimes you have to experience an inferior product to really understand how well it performs...

[Mack Cameron]

I have read the great reviews of the Dowel Max. I ordered the DVD and received it the other day. After looking at the video I was left with the feeling why is this jig so special. I fail to see the difference between it and say a $39 one for Grizzly. Looks to be very well made and it should for just less than $300. I know I am missing something because of the reviews.As DowelMax states in their ads, satisfaction guaranteed or your money back, or words to that effect.

Order it, try it, if you don't like it, send it back, money returned no questions asked.

I'm betting you don't send it back!:D

[Johnny Kleso]

I watched the videos and gace me some ideas to make some indexing pins and a spacer bar for my Dowel-It 2000..

I have to do some thinking on how to flip my Dowel-It and clamp it to a side..

I was able to pick up two at eBay for about $20 each so I have one to alter to the Max :)

[Art Mulder]

it does exactly what it is supposed to with extreme ease and superb accuracy.

Bingo.

Y'know, I can go to to the local hardware store and buy a plane for $35-$40.

And most of us know what kind of results you'll get from that.

Or I can go to Lee Valley and buy a plane. Most of them (the Veritas Bench Planes) start at $210 and go up from there. Why is it that I never see people complaining that the LVT planes are expensive?

[Dave Lehnert]

Thanks!

Like I said. I must be missing something and the reason I asked. I will keep investigating.

[Alan Tolchinsky]

From reading about the Dowelmax(don't own one) the main difference between it and other doweling jigs is this: It doesn't work by self centering on the edge of a board as most dowel jigs do. It REFERENCES FROM AN EDGE which makes it a lot more versatile. Owners please correct me if this is not correct but that feature and very high quality construction is what sets the dowelmax apart from the others.

[Ron Dunn]

Alan, in addition to edge-referencing and quality-construction, I also think that the reconfigurable clamping design of the Dowelmax is a stand-out feature.

[Mack Cameron]

From reading about the Dowelmax(don't own one) the main difference between it and other doweling jigs is this: It doesn't work by self centering on the edge of a board as most dowel jigs do. [quote]It REFERENCES FROM AN EDGE Hello Alan; Actually it references from 2 locations, be they sides or edges or ends etc.
Owners please correct me if this is not correct but that feature and very high quality construction is what sets the dowelmax apart from the others. You are quite correct in this respect.

[Glenn Clabo]

Dave,
What you are missing is using it. I had given up on using dowels for a long time because all the ones I tried and made myself (old machinist here btw) just didn't cut it. It's ALL about accuracy when it comes to a doweled joint...and after I used the Dowel Max once I was sold. I have never used a more accurately designed/manufactured tool...period. I VERY quickly forgot the cost.

[J. Z. Guest]

From reading about the Dowelmax(don't own one) the main difference between it and other doweling jigs is this: It doesn't work by self centering on the edge of a board as most dowel jigs do. It REFERENCES FROM AN EDGE which makes it a lot more versatile. Owners please correct me if this is not correct but that feature and very high quality construction is what sets the dowelmax apart from the others.

I have a Wolfcraft "Dowel Pro" (http://www.wolfcraft.com/product_detail.cfm?id=72) dowel jig that I bought at Home Depot before buying Dowelmax, that also references from the faces of the boards. Not only that, but it references from the faces of both boards at once, so the holes line up perfectly from side-to-side. to be drilled at the same time and the jig is not moved even when drilling the matching holes. This jig allows edge-to-edge, 90°, and edge-to-face doweling. On paper, in the store, and on the box, it looks like a great deal. In practice, it works OK, but it is much slower to use and when the joints are done, they don't line up perfectly.

The accuracy & manufacturing tolerance of the Wolfcraft jig is not precise enough for it to work as it should. Someone came up with a great idea, then decided to cut corners in manufacturing. The jig's body is cast and kind of rough. (as opposed to extruded and/or machined like DM) There are plastic knobs on the clamp screws upon which a wrench is needed to get it tight enough not to move while drilling. But be careful not to torque it too much, as the knobs are just plastic; they could break right off. The guide bushings seem tight enough, but due to the cheap casting they're installed in and sloppy manufacturing tolerances, the holes are not quite where they should be when all is said and done.

Lastly, as Mack mentioned, DM references from a face and an edge where other jigs either self-center or reference from a face only. (and poorly at that)

So what makes the DM so great is that no corners were cut:


Intuitive design (they even stamped check-marks in the jig, so we wouldn't have to keep anything straight in our minds)
Excellent materials (the threaded brass studs and finger nuts just glide like butter)
Precision design, followed by precision manufacture. One without the other is useless.
Excellent customer service; they even have a presence here at The Creek


All I've been writing in the past few weeks may make me seem like OMS' sock puppet. But it isn't true. I'm a tough customer and my respect & loyalty don't come easy. If I have a tool that doesn't live up to its billing, I let it be known. The only bad surprise about DM is the price tag. Once that jagged little pill is swallowed, there are no regrets.

In the time since I bought DM, the Wolfcraft jig is hanging on a screw, taunting me: I "saved" over $200 by buying that one compared to DM. I used it a couple times, and the damned joints didn't align when I was done. I wound up spending more in the end by being cheap in the beginning.

Don't get me wrong, there are apparently some folks who are happy with less expensive doweling jigs. I can only guess that they're edge joining materials that are always the exact same thickness, so the self-centering designs are adequate. But edge-to-edge is only one application for dowels. There is also edge-to-face. Nothing does this like DM.

-Jeremy

P.S. - Alan: if you want my Dowel Pro jig, I'll send it to you for the cost of shipping. (send me a PM) Just do yourself a favor and try it out on scrap wood first. ;)

[Ray Schafer]

I am not going to repeat what I have said in so many other posts, except to say that my Dowelmax is my favorite and most important tool.

[Jim Lindsay]

I have read the great reviews of the Dowel Max. I ordered the DVD and received it the other day. After looking at the video I was left with the feeling why is this jig so special. I fail to see the difference between it and say a $39 one for Grizzly. Looks to be very well made and it should for just less than $300. I know I am missing something because of the reviews.

While I agree that the instruction video is repetitive and I would say pretty boring, it is nothing if not informative, therefore your confusion is confusing! But I am glad you asked the question, as the answer is very easy.

Your perception of the Dowelmax is misdirected, it is not a cheap gadget, it is a professional tool which can be reconfigured to perform, with absolute precision, virtually any joint in existence. The misconception perhaps arises from the name we chose, as referring to Dowelmax as a dowel jig does not do it justice, and we have no wish to be compared to gadgets which invariably do not work. We are in competition with such high quality systems as the Leigh FMT and the Festool Domino. Our system is a fraction of the cost of those systems, yet is stronger, more accurate and more versatile than either. Supervised testing revealed a joint created by Dowelmax was approximately 30% stronger than a comparable M & T and approximately 40% stronger than a double domino. Our strength is a function of the multiple placements of dowels in virtually any configuration, and accuracy of alignment.

We also like woodworkers to know that if the Dowelmax does not do what we say it does, or does not meet expectations, it can be returned for a full refund.

FYI, as an aside we have recently come to realize that we are selling to an elite "niche" market. Numbers are relatively low, as is viability. So by necessity the price will have to rise in 2009, we have absolutely no choice.

Now I did say we have no wish to be compared to gadgets, however to answer the question this one time, I have made the following checklist:


1. Can the Grizzly jig put dowels .667 inches apart, center to center, for close spacing and maximum usage of multiple dowels for high strength? A: No.

2. Can the Grizzly jig do an offset joint? A: No

3. Can the Grizzly jig do a flush joint on two different thicknesses?A: No.

4. Can the Grizzly jig do a double or triple row joint? A: No.

5. Can the Grizzly jig be accurately indexed along a long workpiece such as a tabletop? A: No.

6. Can the Grizzly jig be reconfigured to do cabinet shelves? A: No.

7. Can the Grizzly jig be reconfigured to do a face joint? A: No.

8. Can the Grizzly jig be reconfigured to do a T-type joint? A: No.

9. Can the Grizzly jig be used on a 4x4? A: No, you would have to buy a second larger jig if available, but again the required offset joint is not possible.

10. Is the Grizzly jig manufactured to tolerances of +/-.001 inches? A: No

11. Does the Grizzly jig contain 35 components? A: No

12. Can the Grizzly jig position 10 precisely spaced dowels on the end of a 2 x 4? A: No

13. For what it can do, does the Grizzly jig work? We're not sure, however self centering jigs have a not so good reputation. For some people, they will work well enough.

Jim Lindsay, President...Dowelmax

[Alan Tolchinsky]

Thanks Jeremy, But I'll pass on that offer. There are enough frustrations in life as it is. Do you have any other tools you'd like to send me for shipping only? :D

[Larry James]

To: Jim Lindsay, President...Dowelmax.
See comments after quote.


While I agree that the instruction video is repetitive and I would say pretty boring, it is nothing if not informative, therefore your confusion is confusing! But I am glad you asked the question, as the answer is very easy.

Your perception of the Dowelmax is misdirected, it is not a cheap gadget, it is a professional tool which can be reconfigured to perform, with absolute precision, virtually any joint in existence. The misconception perhaps arises from the name we chose, as referring to Dowelmax as a dowel jig does not do it justice, and we have no wish to be compared to gadgets which invariably do not work. We are in competition with such high quality systems as the Leigh FMT and the Festool Domino. Our system is a fraction of the cost of those systems, yet is stronger, more accurate and more versatile than either. Supervised testing revealed a joint created by Dowelmax was approximately 30% stronger than a comparable M & T and approximately 40% stronger than a double domino. Our strength is a function of the multiple placements of dowels in virtually any configuration, and accuracy of alignment.

We also like woodworkers to know that if the Dowelmax does not do what we say it does, or does not meet expectations, it can be returned for a full refund.

FYI, as an aside we have recently come to realize that we are selling to an elite "niche," market. Numbers are relatively low, as is viability. So by necessity the price will have to rise in 2009, we have absolutely no choice.

Now I did say we have no wish to be compared to gadgets, however to answer the question this one time, I have made the following checklist:


1. Can the Grizzly jig put dowels .667 inches apart, center to center, for close spacing and maximum usage of multiple dowels for high strength? A: No.

2. Can the Grizzly jig do an offset joint? A: No

3. Can the Grizzly jig do a flush joint on two different thicknesses?A: No.

4. Can the Grizzly jig do a double or triple row joint? A: No.

5. Can the Grizzly jig be accurately indexed along a long workpiece such as a tabletop? A: No.

6. Can the Grizzly jig be reconfigured to do cabinet shelves? A: No.

7. Can the Grizzly jig be reconfigured to do a face joint? A: No.

8. Can the Grizzly jig be reconfigured to do a T-type joint? A: No.

9. Can the Grizzly jig be used on a 4x4? A: No, you would have to buy a second larger jig if available, but again the required offset joint is not possible.

10. Is the Grizzly jig manufactured to tolerances of +/-.001 inches? A: No

11. Does the Grizzly jig contain 35 components? A: No

12. Can the Grizzly jig position 10 precisely spaced dowels on the end of a 2 x 4? A: No

13. For what it can do, does the Grizzly jig work? We're not sure, however self centering jigs have a not so good reputation. For some people, they will work well enough.

Jim Lindsay, President...Dowelmax


I'm considering buying the Dowelmax. The comments and reviews I have read are overwhelmingly positive.

Your reply to Dave Lehnert's post is condescending. I'm not speaking for Dave, but I see the comment - "Your perception of the Dowelmax is misdirected..." - as an affront to members of this forum. Obviously, one would conclude a $300 tool should be superior in some way to a $40 tool. Forum members are a diverse group of tool users, not manufacturers. Users have specific needs and budget constraints. Dowels and dowel jigs have been successfully used for a very long time and you may have built a better "mouse trap." However, for the occasional dowel user, not part of the "elite "niche" market", the Grizzly tool may be all that is needed.

Also, for you to use the the Grizzly name over and over in a negative manner ("cheap gadget") appears to be an attack on a company that manufactures many, many fine products, some of which I own. I think a responsible person promoting their product in an open forum would be more tactful.

Finally, at $300 per jig, I would think you could afford $6 to become a Contributing Member of this forum. Click on the link below.

PS Also visit - Free Stuff Drawings! (http://sawmillcreek.org/forumdisplay.php?f=16)

Larry

[Tom Veatch]

... It doesn't work by self centering on the edge of a board as most dowel jigs do. It REFERENCES FROM AN EDGE which makes it a lot more versatile. ...

Like the old Stanley #59 Dowel Jig? Of course the Stanley only sets up on one hole at a time, but it handles my needs quite well.

[Jim Lindsay]

To: Jim Lindsay, President...Dowelmax.
See comments after quote.



I'm considering buying the Dowelmax. The comments and reviews I have read are overwhelmingly positive.

Your reply to Dave Lehnert's post is condescending. I'm not speaking for Dave, but I see the comment - "Your perception of the Dowelmax is misdirected..." - as an affront to members of this forum. Obviously, one would conclude a $300 tool should be superior in some way to a $40 tool. Forum members are a diverse group of tool users, not manufacturers. Users have specific needs and budget constraints. Dowels and dowel jigs have been successfully used for a very long time and you may have built a better "mouse trap." However, for the occasional dowel user, not part of the "elite "niche" market", the Grizzly tool may be all that is needed.

Also, for you to use the the Grizzly name over and over in a negative manner ("cheap gadget") appears to be an attack on a company that manufactures many, many fine products, some of which I own. I think a responsible person promoting their product in an open forum would be more tactful.

Finally, at $300 per jig, I would think you could afford $6 to become a Contributing Member of this forum. Click on the link below.

PS Also visit - Free Stuff Drawings! (http://sawmillcreek.org/forumdisplay.php?f=16)

Larry

Larry,

It was not our intention for the post to seem condescending, and if that is the perception then we apologize. The answer was born partially out of frustration and sometimes the tone of communication by email seems stronger than what was meant.

Regards,
Jim Lindsay, Dowelmax.

[Larry James]

Larry,

It was not our intention for the post to seem condescending, and if that is the perception then we apologize. The answer was born partially out of frustration and sometimes the tone of communication by email seems stronger than what was meant.

Regards,
Jim Lindsay, Dowelmax.

Jim, apology not necessary, but accepted. I'm sure forum members using or interested in Dowelmax look forward to your input.

Larry

[J. Z. Guest]

Thanks Jeremy, But I'll pass on that offer. There are enough frustrations in life as it is. Do you have any other tools you'd like to send me for shipping only? :D

Alan, I also have a generic pocket screw jig, which I similarly replaced with a Kreg K3 system. It is all (pot) metal! Highest quarity. It is either "General" brand or "Lucky Dragon." I can't remember which. :D

Oh, I also have some Woodcraft drill bit stop collars that are allegedly superior to the set screw types because the allen screw makes the stop collar itself pinch down on the bit. The only problem is that they don't actually fit the bits. They're too big, and they don't tighten down enough to actually function as stop collars. They're more like "stop bracelets."

[Dave Lehnert]

Thanks for all the info. My question was in no way to Down the Dowel Max. If I thought it was not worth the money I would have not wasted my time with this post. I asked only because I know I am not understanding the benefits of the jig over others.

[Craig Kershaw]

Jeremy's list hit the nail dead on for me. Yes $300 is a lot of money, but the Dowelmax works like a charm. It's well thought out and well built. I've got two other pieces of crap that purport to do the job but don't even come close. One of them cost about $65, looked good on paper, but the holes don't line up, not even close.

What is most telling about the product is that there are virtually NO bad reviews of it. I looked and I couldn't find any. It seems that every make of equipment has got its critics, but the Dowelmax critics seem few and far between.

[Christopher Foote]

I reallly enjoy reading the forum and have found lots of useful information here.

I had thought about the dowelmax as a means of producing quick joints, but ultimately decided against it. Price was not a factor. My reasoning was that as a hobbyists I produce such a limited number of pieces, that I want each piece to be of the highest quality both aesthetically and structurally.

There are quite a few studies looking at the strength of various joints and I have never seen one that ranked a dowelled joint as the strongest or stronger than an M/T.

Thus I'd be interested in further edification from this statement:

"Supervised testing revealed a joint created by Dowelmax was approximately 30% stronger than a comparable M & T and approximately 40% stronger than a double domino."

As it stands, I'm dubious.


Christopher Foote (30% stronger and 40% smarter than your average gadget salesman :rolleyes:)

[Art Mulder]

There are quite a few studies looking at the strength of various joints and I have never seen one that ranked a dowelled joint as the strongest or stronger than an M/T.

Christopher, I've seen these sorts of studies also.

However, I look at them with suspicion. First, these tests invariably "destructi vely test" a joint -- that is, they push on it until it fails. I have yet to see a test that manages to simulate the passage of time: annual humidity swings, repeated opening/closing (doors) or repeated sitting on (stools/benches), repeated dragging across a floor (chairs), and so on. Those sorts of things also contribute to joint failure, and they do NOT get measured in a destructive test.

Second, I have yet to see a test like this that tells us just how much strength is "good enough". For instance if joint A fails at 500lbs of pressure, and joint B fails at 450lbs of pressure, but the joint only realistically needs to endure 300lbs... then does it really matter if you use A or B? Is A still "Better", when both are "good enough"???

best,
...art

[Jerome Hanby]

I There are quite a few studies looking at the strength of various joints and I have never seen one that ranked a dowelled joint as the strongest or stronger than an M/T.

Maybe I mis-interpreted the original statement, but when he talked about his doweled joint being stringer than a M/T, I assumed he was talking about a Domino joint. I guess a better description would be a loose M/t...

With that said, I'd like to read those studies too. I keep feeling left out because I haven't jumped on the Domino band wagon and would love soem justification for being too cheap to buy one :p

[J. Z. Guest]

Christopher, Jerome: There are videos of the actual tests on this page of the Dowelmax website. (http://www.dowelmax.com/test_results.htm) They look quite fair to me.

The only thing that remains to be seen is how they stand the test of time. Humidity changes and so for. The stuff that Art was referring to.

Before someone brings up the 25 year old article from Fine Woodworking again, lets remember that these tests were not done with expansible dowels and may not even be relevant to this situation.

[Chris Padilla]

I mocked up the Dowelmax and M&T test pice in Sketch-Up just because I wanted to. They should be dead nuts on for dimensions:

Stock is 2 3/4" by 3/4" of some arbitrary length (I chose 6", if you're curious).

The top pic is obviously 4 dowels, 3/8" diameter, and placed such that it matches the tenon below it, which is 2 1/4" wide by 5/16" thick.

Both the tenon and the dowels stick out of the stock 1". Keep in mind that this tenon, I BELIEVE, is an integral tenon and not a floating one. I'll get to why that is important later.

My first question is why wasn't the tenon made 3/8" to match the dowels?

The circumfrence of a circle 3/8" diameter is 2*pi*3/16" = 1.18" so the area of the side of the dowels is 1.18" * 1" = 1.18 sq. in. Also, there is the area of the face of the dowel: pi*3/16" * 3/16" = 0.11 sq. in. So the total surface area of the dowel is 1.29 sq. in. Now mulitply this by 4 to get 5.15 sq. in. of surface area for the 1" of exposed dowel as seen in the picture below.

Now let's calculate the total surface area of the exposed tenon. The face is 5/16" * 2 1/4" = 0.7 sq. in. We have a short side: 5/16" * 1" = 5/16 sq. and mulitply that by 2 for 5/8 sq. in. We have a long side: 2 1/4" * 1" = 2 1/4 sq. in. times 2 is 4 1/2 sq. in.

0.7 + 5/8 + 4 1/2 = 5.83 sq. in. of exposed tenon as seen in the pic below. I think I have my answer about why the tenon didn't match the dowels in the 3/8" dimension. That's cool...we have about equal glue surface area between the two with the tenon having a slight edge....

...OR DO WE? Well, assuming the tenon is integral, this wouldn't be true at all because dowels are, in their most basic form, floating tenons and therefore we'd need to DOUBLE the glue surface area for the dowels to 10.3 sq. in.

Most of us are aware that the glue is stronger than the wood and I would ask that the test be redone with a true floating tenon that is glued in both joints, just like the dowels are. I think that would be a more fair test.

Now if the test was done with a floating tenon such that glue area is comparable, I can only think that the compressed wood might fill the motise fuller and tighter than the tenon did. I also think that a round structure might put less stress than a stucture with a sharp corner like a tenon has. The flow if the grain also plays more of a part in the strength of a tenon than in the use of the dowels due to the geometry. Finally, I think dowels can be made to fit better than a tenon and that, too, probably adds to its strength.

So thinking about it for a little bit, I can understand how a doweled joint can be stronger than a tenon, assuming equal glue area.

[J. Z. Guest]

Wow Chris. Quite a lot of detective work, but I bet it wasn't that complicated.

[Luis Oliveira]

Bingo.
Why is it that I never see people complaining that the LVT planes are expensive?


Because they will be too ashamed to publicly acknowledge it :D

sorry I just could not help it.

[Chris Padilla]

Wow Chris. Quite a lot of detective work, but I bet it wasn't that complicated.

Not really complicated, just basic geometry.

BTW, I was thinking last night: I should not have included the endgrain when calculating the glue surface area.

Dowels: 4.72 sq. in. should be the more realistic glue surface area but then double it to 9.44 sq. in.

Tenon: 5.13 sq. in. assuming an integral tenon (non-floating)

So I'd still like to know if the testing on the Dowelmax site was compard to an floating tenon or an integral tenon. I hope Mr. Lindsay can answer this for us.

[J. Z. Guest]

Since they didn't mention it, I would assume integral tenons. Usually, folks seem to include "loose." if it applies.

As long as we're getting down to the nitty-gritty, I should question whether surface area as far as glue is concerned is effected by the fact that straight fluted dowels are used? The dowels will have more glue area, but the hole still doesn't.

It seems like they would use a traditional tenon dimension, i.e. 1/3 the thickness of the workpiece, since that is how it is done in the real world. Did you take "virtual" measuremens of the tenon from the photos on the Dowelmax site on the page with strength testing?

[Chris Padilla]

I suspect a good old traditional M&T was used and that is why the results show that dowels are stronger. I just couldn't get my head wrapped around why dowels could be much stronger but some thinking opened a few doors...for me anyways.

Good point about calculating glue-surface area. Once could use the mortise or the tenon. I would think the one with the smallest area would be the number to use but then again, I'm not sure. Hmmmm, more thinking to do!! :D

The dimensions of all test pieces are given on the site, Jeremy. I just used those. :)

[Christopher Foote]

One definitely needs to take into consideration adhesive strength when calculating the strength of a joint. Adhesive strength is greatly compromised when long grain is glued to end grain, and even more so when it is endgrain to endgrain. This is why dowels are inferior to a tenon in a 90 degree joint. Only a very small portion of the dowel is actually long grain to long grain.

To further illustrate this point, what if you compared a doweled joint with 4 dowels to one with 4 square tenons of equal surface area to the dowels. The latter has a greater glue strength due to more long grain to long grain contact. However the size of the square tenons/dowels would be smaller than the round ones. A sphere has the lowest surface area to volume ratio of any shape (that's why polar bears are big and round, as this arrangement minimizes heat loss).

This is why in the example a 5/16" tenon is used instead of 3/8". If instead a 3/8" tenon was used one would certainly see different results. The strength of a joint is contingent more upon the thickness of the tenon/dowel than it is on the available glueable surface area. Thus I think that dowelmax is getting the results they want by using comparable surface area instead of comparable thickness.

An additional point is that all glues lose adhesive strength and will eventually fail over time.

All this is academic though. It would be interesting to get some feedback from furniture restoration folks. Do they see more repairs for dowelled joints or M/T joints? My guess is the former.

Christopher

[M Smith]

Just placed my order for a DowelMax today. I'm in the planning stages of a toy box for my kids and, based on the reviews, am going to go the DowelMax route. I have a biscuit joiner (Ryobi) that produces so-so results, and instead of investing in another one (the Ryobi was a gift), the reviews of the DowelMax have me cautiously optimistic that it's going to be a winner. The opinions and advice here haven't let me down yet!

Mark

[Brian W Evans]

I find Christopher's point to be very compelling. The point has been made before on this forum about the long grain-long grain gluing surfaces and it makes sense. Dowels are used because they're quick, easy, and cheap, not because they're better than the alternatives. M&T isn't used because it is the opposite of these things, even when it might be the best choice.

I have been considering buying a DM for some time now, and have decided to go ahead and get one, despite what I said above. Here's why:

1) It's quick, easy, and cheap (the dowels are, anyway).
2) Sometimes a dowel joint is more than enough.
3) It seems great for getting parts to align properly.
4) By all accounts, it's a great product that will last a lifetime.

However, I do not see myself using it on pieces I would consider to be fine furniture or heirloom pieces. Here's why:

1) I would hate to think that my friends and relatives, having received a hand-made gift from me, would at any point find a failed joint with dowels in it. Dowels have a stigma, deserved or not - it's there, of being cheap. This goes back to the very aptly named thread "Dowelmax vs tradition and the intangible mystique thing (http://www.sawmillcreek.org/showthread.php?t=69902)". This may be irrational, but so is spending 5 figures on tools so I can make sawdust;)

2) I believe that Christopher's point about the quality (as opposed to the quantity) of gluing surfaces is true and I want my joinery to be the best-suited to the task - not just the quickest.

3) Finally, and this has been pointed out before as well, I didn't get into woodworking so I could build a piece of furniture by drilling 100 holes. To me that doesn't sound like much fun and, since I am a hobbiest, fun is part of the equation. Chopping a mortise by hand isn't much fun either, but when it's done and everything fits properly - man, what a great feeling! I don't get that from my drill.

Cheers!

[Chris Padilla]

One definitely needs to take into consideration adhesive strength when calculating the strength of a joint. Adhesive strength is greatly compromised when long grain is glued to end grain, and even more so when it is endgrain to endgrain.

Agree...that is why I removed the end-grain area from my calculation. It is also why I never glue the shoulders of a tenon: little strength is achieved and I have squeeze-out to clean up. :)



This is why dowels are inferior to a tenon in a 90 degree joint. Only a very small portion of the dowel is actually long grain to long grain.
To further illustrate this point, what if you compared a doweled joint with 4 dowels to one with 4 square tenons of equal surface area to the dowels. The latter has a greater glue strength due to more long grain to long grain contact. However the size of the square tenons/dowels would be smaller than the round ones.

I don't quite get this part. I guess you don't consider the dowel's "sides" to be all long-grain? I agree the face is end-grain but the rest of the dowel is all long-grain...just like a tenon. Square or round, it is all long-grain. What else could it be?



This is why in the example a 5/16" tenon is used instead of 3/8". If instead a 3/8" tenon was used one would certainly see different results. The strength of a joint is contingent more upon the thickness of the tenon/dowel than it is on the available glueable surface area. Thus I think that dowelmax is getting the results they want by using comparable surface area instead of comparable thickness.

I think the 5/16" tenon was used to get a comparable glue-surface area...3/8" would have given the tenon, perhaps, an unfair advantage but I already made the assertion that the whole test was unfair because the dowels have glue on both side...the integral tenon only has glue on one side (assuming I'm correct than an integral tenon was used in the Dowelmax stress testing).

Further, with modern glues, all test-to-failure I've seen of various joints have always had the wood break before the glue broke so I still believe glue surface area (especially long-grain to long-grain) to reign surpreme for deciding joint strength.

[Christopher Foote]

All of the sides of a dowel are long grain, however the drilled holes are a combination of long grain, end grain and something in between the two. With a mortise and tenon, the mortise is predomininatly long grain, with only the thickness of your tenon being endgrain in the mortise. Thus it's common practice to cut mortises slightly wider than the width of the tenon, and in fact the domino has two different settings to do this so that alignment isn't problematic.

Another point to make on surface area, is if you cut 2 strips of paper 2 1/4" wide X 2" long and used them as two loose tenons you would have considerably more surface area than one tenon that is 5/16" X 2 1/4" X 2" and one really weak floppy joint, thus equal surface area is not a good metric to use, and good luck cutting a .003" thick mortise :rolleyes:. We live and make furniture in three dimensions, not two, if I were to perform the experiment I would use equal volume for the dowels and the tenon and have the smallest dimension of the tenon = to the diameter of the dowel.

In the interest of full disclosure I guess I should mention I got a Domino last month, and love it!

Christopher

[Phil Thien]

However, I do not see myself using it on pieces I would consider to be fine furniture or heirloom pieces. Here's why: [Edited out...]

Cheers!

You know those beautiful James Krenov cabinets are often held together (the carcases, anyhow) with dowels, right? :rolleyes:

[Glenn Clabo]

And...ah...some guy named Maloof seems to use them sometimes.

[Chris Padilla]

All of the sides of a dowel are long grain, however the drilled holes are a combination of long grain, end grain and something in between the two. With a mortise and tenon, the mortise is predomininatly long grain, with only the thickness of your tenon being endgrain in the mortise. Thus it's common practice to cut mortises slightly wider than the width of the tenon, and in fact the domino has two different settings to do this so that alignment isn't problematic.

Ya know, I keep forgetting about the darn mortise in my thinking! I agree with this...it just takes my square peg of a brain to accept your round peg of logic! :rolleyes:


Another point to make on surface area, is if you cut 2 strips of paper 2 1/4" wide X 2" long and used them as two loose tenons you would have considerably more surface area than one tenon that is 5/16" X 2 1/4" X 2" and one really weak floppy joint, thus equal surface area is not a good metric to use, and good luck cutting a .003" thick mortise :rolleyes:. We live and make furniture in three dimensions, not two, if I were to perform the experiment I would use equal volume for the dowels and the tenon and have the smallest dimension of the tenon = to the diameter of the dowel.

I used surface area because that is all that will contact between a tenon and mortise (more or less). You've cleared up my thoughts in terms of considering the mortise more but your paper analogy is lost on me. :) A volume measurement doesn't make any sense if all one is considering is the glue strength, which is essentially so thin one could think of it as 2-D because it doesn't really "soak in" deep into the wood or fully penetrate the wood. Sure, the the actual volume of wood is important in the overall strength of the joint but the glue only gets applied to the surfaces around that volume.



In the interest of full disclosure I guess I should mention I got a Domino last month, and love it!

Christopher

Ditto...I have one as well. However, I have a project (a gate) in which the largest domino is too small for my liking so it'll be floating tenons however I will use the domino to "start" the mortises and check for fit before digging in with my mortising chisels. :)

[Brian W Evans]

You know those beautiful James Krenov cabinets are often held together (the carcases, anyhow) with dowels, right? :rolleyes:


And...ah...some guy named Maloof seems to use them sometimes.


Here I was trying to take the "intangible mystique" high road and you had to go and ruin it. ;)

HOWEVER, if it's good enough for them I guess I can condescend to use a few.:p

[Mike Heidrick]

Ditto...I have one as well. However, I have a project (a gate) in which the largest domino is too small for my liking so it'll be floating tenons however I will use the domino to "start" the mortises and check for fit before digging in with my mortising chisels. :)

Use the Dowlemax to join some dominos!

[Chris Padilla]

Use the Dowlemax to join some dominos!

LOL! That just made my Friday!!

I could domino a domino?!

[Glenn Clabo]

Chris,
Wouldn't it be then called the domino effect?

[Jim Lindsay]

Regarding the various testing methods, I can understand your scepticism since I too have reviewed tests which I did not consider valid. It seems like everyone has an agenda and therefore the perception would be that we at Dowelmax would also have an agenda, and a reason to somewhat distort the readings. This could not be farther from the truth. I honestly believe if you wilfully distort the readings the consequences could be disastrous.

In order to prove the sincerity of our findings (we too were surprised!) I would willingly repeat the entire process in full view of any forum member. There has to be a member in Vancouver somewhere, so if he or she will come forward they could visit our offices in North Vancouver and put us to the test.

Response to query posted by Jerome Hanby:

The first test we conducted did not include a domino sample. The multiple dowel joint (4 dowels) failed at 910 lb. per square inch, which was 51.66% stronger than the M & T (made by a local professional furniture maker). The second test did include a double domino made by Mike Kampen (furniture maker and contributing editor to Canadian Woodworking magazine), and the multiple dowel joint proved to be 30.88% stronger than the routed M & T (Leigh FMT) and 64.81% stronger than the double domino.

Response to Jeremy Zorns:

Your comments regarding humidity, repeated stresses etc. are valid. They are however beyond our scope of testing both in logistics and costs. However it seems logical to assume that the stronger the joint at the outset, the greater resilience which would exist over a period of time.

Response to Chris Padilla:

Chris the size of the stock utilized for our tests was determined by the size required to accommodate the #20 biscuit. The M & T and dowel joint were therefore sized to reasonably compare. It is our considered opinion that if there is a weakness in the M & T, it is the mortise, not the tenon, therefore we believe that if the tenon was made 3/8 inch thick the joint would have been weaker and the test therefore invalid. We did however leave the size to the professional furniture maker and he chose 5/16 inch.

We also believe that even although the dowels are in actual fact, loose tenons, only 50% of the dowel length is relevant in calculation of the surface area. And that calculation should also include the mating face or butt face of the joint. My calculation is as follows: the tenon joint in question 7.187 square inches, the 4 dowel joint 6.7 square inches. In most of our tests (not all) every single joint with the exception of the dowel joints, pulled out and failed, whereas in most occasions (not all) with the dowel joint, with wood failed at the lower axis of the dowel ends.

Response to Art Mulder (regarding how much strength is good enough):

We absolutely agree. It is my personal opinion that the domino, square M & T and routed M & T are all excellent joints, and will fill most requirements. However it has to be said that we discovered the multiple dowel joint is not only more accurate, but stronger.

Response to Christopher Foote:

Christopher, I honestly believe that the problems you raised were conditions which existed years ago before the advent of multiple dowels. In a recent test which was done with, as you can see on our web site, long grain to edge grain, the failure rates were 890 and 910 lbs per square inch. You will also note that the wood failed and not the joint. In other words the multiple dowel arrangement and rounded configuration of dowels obviates problems which may have existed in the past.

We would have been only too happy to state that the Dowelmax was equal in strength to the M & T, but to discover it was stronger was exhilarating. It is our belief that the reason for the additional strength is (a) the accuracy, (b) the close spacing of the multiple dowels, and (c) the geometric configuration of the dowel (rounded surfaces – reduced stress riser effect).

Jim Lindsay, Dowelmax

[Chris Padilla]

Regarding the various testing methods, I can understand your scepticism since I too have reviewed tests which I did not consider valid. It seems like everyone has an agenda and therefore the perception would be that we at Dowelmax would also have an agenda, and a reason to somewhat distort the readings. This could not be farther from the truth. I honestly believe if you wilfully distort the readings the consequences could be disastrous.

In order to prove the sincerity of our findings (we too were surprised!) I would willingly repeat the entire process in full view of any forum member. There has to be a member in Vancouver somewhere, so if he or she will come forward they could visit our offices in North Vancouver and put us to the test.

Jim, thanks very much for addressing our questions and concerns. I have no doubt that your tests are sincere...I just think the case of the integral tenon versus a dowel is not a fair comparison. A floating tenon versus a dowel would be more fair IMO.


Chris the size of the stock utilized for our tests was determined by the size required to accommodate the #20 biscuit. The M & T and dowel joint were therefore sized to reasonably compare. It is our considered opinion that if there is a weakness in the M & T, it is the mortise, not the tenon, therefore we believe that if the tenon was made 3/8 inch thick the joint would have been weaker and the test therefore invalid. We did however leave the size to the professional furniture maker and he chose 5/16 inch.

Interesting. Note that I kept thinking more of the tenon than I did of the mortise and Christopher got me thinking better after that. I figured you did some surface area calculation to get things close.


We also believe that even although the dowels are in actual fact, loose tenons, only 50% of the dowel length is relevant in calculation of the surface area. And that calculation should also include the mating face or butt face of the joint. My calculation is as follows: the tenon joint in question 7.187 square inches, the 4 dowel joint 6.7 square inches. In most of our tests (not all) every single joint with the exception of the dowel joints, pulled out and failed, whereas in most occasions (not all) with the dowel joint, with wood failed at the lower axis of the dowel ends.


I guess I would need to see WHERE the M&T joint broke versus the dowel joint. If the M&T broke at the mortise, then you may have a valid point about only considering the half the glue surface area. It still doesn't seem fair to me that a dowel gets glued on both sides and the M&T only gets glued on one side. I'd like to ask you to include a video demonstration of a floating M&T joint and see how that performs in your testing. I think it might be very interesting.



We would have been only too happy to state that the Dowelmax was equal in strength to the M & T, but to discover it was stronger was exhilarating. It is our belief that the reason for the additional strength is (a) the accuracy, (b) the close spacing of the multiple dowels, and (c) the geometric configuration of the dowel (rounded surfaces – reduced stress riser effect).

After some thinking I agree with all your (a-c) points and stated them as such in my previous posts HOWEVER, I still think you have one more test to perform! :D

Many thanks for your participation in this thread. I think it has been a very good and healthy exchange of thoughts and ideas and I look forward to it continuing.

One thing I like about the Dowelmax is that the depth of the mortise is only limited by the length of a drill bit. Not so with the Domino and with my rather large gate (~4' x 7') having stiles and rails roughly the size of a 2x6, the Domino ain't gonna cut it for me. It'll start the process but I will need to drill out deeper mortises and fashion my own floating tenons.

:)

[Jerome Hanby]

Great information!

Regarding the various testing methods, ....
Jim Lindsay, Dowelmax

[Bryan Berguson]

Oh, I also have some Woodcraft drill bit stop collars that are allegedly superior to the set screw types because the allen screw makes the stop collar itself pinch down on the bit. The only problem is that they don't actually fit the bits. They're too big, and they don't tighten down enough to actually function as stop collars. They're more like "stop bracelets."

Hey, I have some of those collars! I just thought I didn't have the right size drill bits to fit them! :rolleyes: All this time and it was the collars that were the problem!:D

Bryan

[Frank Silva]

Maybe the Dowl-It jig has been mention in this thread and I missed it. I’ve been using the Dowl-It http://www.dowl-it.com/ (http://www.dowl-it.com/) jig on my latest project and I'm very happy with it. The company produces multiple configurations of their jig. I found it to be very sturdy and reasonably priced and their customer support is excellent. I had some questions on the unit I bought, emailed them and got a call back from some one very knowledge on the product. I bought mine online from www.7corners.com (http://www.7corners.com/) . Don’t get me wrong, I’m not saying it's equivelent to the DowelMax, this is a sturdy, precise centering dowel jig for a ¼ the cost.

[Art Mann]

I used a Dowel-it for a while and built several pieces with it before getting a Dowelmax. With some difficulty, it can be made to work. The tool is ok but the design is simply inferior. The self centering aspect is not a feature but rather a nuisance. It creates more problems than it solves. It is worthless for making joints where the two pieces are not the same thickness. The biggest problem with dowel jigs is getting the dowels spaced precisely the same distance apart and precisely the correct distance from the edge of the piece. If you drill it wrong, there is no good way to recover. You have none of these problems with the Dowelmax. It is easy to locate perfect spacing of holes in multiple rows and columns every time with little effort using the Dowelmax. It is up to the individual to decide whether this capability is worth the extra cost.