Comparing/Contrasting Captive Hollowing Systems

[Glen Blanchard]

I presently own two articulated hollowing systems and am pleased with both. That said, someday I may decide to acquire a captive system, although I am not currently in the market for one. Thus this post is more for my own edification than it is to aid me with a purchasing decision – at least for now.

The two systems I would instinctively look at first are those sold by Lyle Jamieson and Steve Sinner and these are the two I’d like to compare here.

While Lyle’s system uses a traditional ‘D’ style boring bar, Steve’s merely has two bars welded next to each other to provide the anti-rotational resistance. It would appear that one would be just as effective at resisting rotation as the other. However, Steve’s design has an advantage as the boring bar has a smaller footprint. Thus it would seem that Steve’s rig allows for greater lateral travel of the boring bar before it reaches the stops at either end of the trap (assuming traps of equal length). In theory, this would mean less frequent re-positioning of the trap. To look at it another way, it seems that Mr. Sinner’s design requires a trap of lesser length to allow the same degree of travel of the boring bar.


I am wondering if these observations are valid and to what extent they effect daily use of the rig.

[Joe Meirhaeghe]

Glen I have been using Steve's system since 2008 and have hollowed hundreds of vessels from 3" to 32" deep. I have every size boring bar he makes (3/4"- 1"- 1 1/8"- and 1 1/4" diameter bars). You are correct in that you have great lateral movement with Steve's system. I rarely move the trap more than once after setup. Even then it's a 2 second job release the banjo slide it over & lock down the banjo again.
One other advantage of Steve's with the welded double solid steel bars it that you can go much deeper with his than anybody else using the same diameter single bar. The double bar has much more mass & is more ridged.
I encourage you to talk to other people who have Steve's system they come highly recommended. Another big consideration is the cutter you use on the boring bar. There is a huge difference between cutters.

[Mike Nathal]

I have the Jamieson system and in general I am quite happy with it. Note there is about an 1/8 inch clearance between the D-handle and the trap bars. This means the D-handle is basically sitting on the bottom trap bar, not touching the top bar. I haven't used the Sinner system but it looks like the double steel bars are being "squeezed" between the trap bars. I think this will allow the Sinner system to achieve the same torque resistance as Jamieson with the wider D handle. I think his system needs the wider separation of the D-handle to achieve adequate torque resistance. I agree that the Sinner system would give you more lateral movement. I think this is an advantage, however I haven't noticed this as a huge problem with the Jamieson. I move the trap a couple of times per hollow form. The one thing I like about Jamieson is that his boring bar comes with 3 different reach configurations. The one where the pivoting cutter head is inserted at a 45 degree angle is particularly useful when I am making a "flying saucer" shape, (maybe 3 inch high, 10 inch diameter). (As an aside, I tried a similar shape with a Monster articulated arm and found the vibrations were much worse with the Monster when trying to excavate the final 1-2 inches of the flying saucer's diameter). I had to give it up and use the Jamieson to finish it.) My biggest frustration with the Jamieson system was his laser. I think the batteries are vibrating up and down during use, and have very short life. The Sinner system looks like it separates the batteries from the laser, might solve that problem. Anyway, I switched to a camera (a cheap "endoscope" type) and like that much better, haven't used a laser in over a year. The other advantage of Jamieson is the price.

[Glen Blanchard]

The one thing I like about Jamieson is that his boring bar comes with 3 different reach configurations.

Agreed. Jamieson seems to have a wider range of configuration at the business end of the bar. Between the 90 degree/45 degree boring bar end, the straight versus curved cutter assemblies, and the swivel cutter, it seems that Lyle has just about every tool presentation angle covered. I don't see this amount of versatility with the Sinner system. It would appear that using Jamieson's assemblies with Sinner's boring bar would require a bushing.

Anyway, I switched to a camera (a cheap "endoscope" type) and like that much better, haven't used a laser in over a year. The other advantage of Jamieson is the price.

I did as well and have never looked back.

[Joe Meirhaeghe]

As I mentioned above there is a huge difference in cutters used in boring bars. Steve & I would both recommend using a Rolly Munro articulated cutter for both versatility & speed for hollowing. With the addition of a link & the articulating of the Munro cutter you can under cut most any inside shoulder you would want.
Steve's trap is also adjustable to use with different size boring bars & you can tighten it down till it just about touches the top of the bar limiting it's side torque.
I have heard of a number of people who have owned Lyle's system that do a lot of hollowing switch the Steve's system. Once again I would encourage you to talk to other owners or find someone with Steve's system & ask them to let you try it out.
I know Steve's system is not inexpensive however if you plan to actually do a lot of hollowing I really feel it's worth it.
Steve is planning on being at the AAW symposium in Kansas City & I'm planning on being there working with him in his booth. Stop by & have a close look at his system & say hi.
Disclaimer I have been working with Steve in his Studio one or two days a week for the last 9 yrs now.

[Dueane Hicks]

I have been looking at the Oneway hollowing system. Has anyone had any experience with it? There is virtually no information or reviews on it.