Looks like a nice piece of hardware, but I'm a little hesitant to drop that much coin without some reports from the field.
http://www.leevalley.com/us/wood/pag...55&cat=1,41659
[OP]
Contributor
Looks like a nice piece of hardware, but I'm a little hesitant to drop that much coin without some reports from the field.
http://www.leevalley.com/us/wood/pag...55&cat=1,41659
Member
Yikes! That's expensive. No doubt it's top notch quality, but I'd want some good feedback before dropping $300 on one piece of vise hardware too,
Member
I'd love to see reviews as well - given that's it from LV, though, I'd still take a gamble on it if it fit my needs, because I know they're a company apt to stand behind their products. That said, I'd still want to get my hands on one, even in a show room, before I dropped the cash - no doubt it works as designed, but it's nice to have something in hand to see if "as designed" is the same as "what I want"
[OP]
Contributor
Exactly. It might be worth the drive up to Vancouver to see it in the store, but I'd still like to hear from someone who's really played with one. Granted, it's brand new. I assume that the construction is similar to their QR tail vise, which I know has a few happy users and I may also work into my new bench.
Contributor
I got to play with the end vise earlier this year, and I was very impressed. I woulnt mind putting one on my bench... when I get a chance to put one together af a substancial size.
I would imagine that the front vise is just as nice.
Member
One aspect of this that might well justify the price tag is that Lee Valley manufactures to very tight tolerances. The achilles' heel of the lever-type quick release front vises based on the Record design is that sloppy tolerances and/or wear makes the lever release twitchy - the crappy asian-made versions of this design that I've owned had a very irritating habit of quick-releasing while tightening the workpiece in the vise, or when working on the piece and a small amount of lateral force is transmitted to the vise.
It's for that reason that I recommend those looking to economize spend the extra coin for a Jorgensen quick-release front vise. The eccentric cam design of these vises don't have the issues that the Record design does.
What I'd be very interested in is a comment from Rob Lee about the recommended span for the user-supplied vise jaws. Most quick-release front vises suffer from really wide vise jaws - they put too much racking force on the guide rods.
Member
FWIW, from the manual:Originally Posted by David Keller NC
Size of the front jaws: the mechanism of the vise has been designed around a nominal jaw width of 18-1/2". Wider is possible if required; however, a jaw wider than 24" will begin to put higher-than-anticipated side loads on the vise.
Member
Ahh - That's helpful. I would think 18-1/2 inches would be more then enough, since you can't clamp pieces for dovetailing between the vise screws like you can on a twin-screw vise. There are various techniques that I've tried to put a shim on the other side of the vise to prevent racking; the cleverest that I've seen was Garret Hack's solution (an inset sliding wedge that can be adjusted for the correct thickness with a mallet tap).
All of them, though, are still a pain in the tail while working, so generally I just ignore the racking problem and figure I'll wear out the vise a bit sooner.
Contributor
I have the Jorgensen vise and it racks like crazy so I made a bunch of T-shaped spacers of my typical thicknesses. These slide and drop in quickly and you don't have to catch them when you release the vise.
Member
Does anyone think there's a problem with installing that new Lee Valley front vise on a thick (4"+) top? It seems that this vise was intended for a thinner top with an apron and I can't tell whether there would be a problem with the vise being mounted that far below the top. The steel Jorgensen-type vises seem to be better suited for installation on thicker tops.
Same with the LV tail vise. Seems intended to be used with a bench top that has an apron as opposed to a thick apron-less top.
Thoughts?
Steve
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote