OK let's see how owners rate their thicknessers in terms of quality output ie smoothness and snipe
Printable View
OK let's see how owners rate their thicknessers in terms of quality output ie smoothness and snipe
The H & F thicknesser that I voted Excellent is the T13 model. It's virtually a single speed JET.
Mat,
I haven't voted in the poll because I think it may skew the results: I have an old Ryobi AP12, rather than the current AP13. The retail price for the AP12 was more than twice that of the current retail price of the AP13 and I think it was probably worth the price difference. Besides the lower power (when compared to a stationary machine)disposable blades and the lack of a chip collector I have no complaints about the machine. It has no snipe, as long as long heavy lengths of stock are well supported and an even cut across its width. At the time of purchase the only other option was a Makita which was roughly the same price and which had a stationary cutterhead. Depth of cut was set by changing the table height, making permanent in and outfeed support difficult. At the time I was also doing a lot of onsite work, so a larger machine was not an option.
Mick
I don't think it's entirely fair to rate any tool unless you also have a price comparison. You have to compare apples with apples.
I don't think it is ever going to be "fair" as different numbers of people are going to have different brands.
The way I intend to interpret this is by individual machine and of course there are difficulties with this too, as pointed out, as different models can vary enormously.
I would just like to get a feel if a large number of owners of a particular brand are happy with their choice.
Its interesting that all of the thicknessers including the low end machines are rated "good" by their owners.
Mine's a CT-340 (C=Crappy T=Taiwanese) 1998 model so I can't vote!
When it was new it was "good"
Then after having bearings and chains replaced it was "very bad"
Then I tuned it and set the blades and infeed and outfeed rollers properly (a skill obviously lacking in the guy that repaired it) and it was "good" again.
Then I tried running stuff through on a bit of old melamine shelf material, and it became "fantastic"!
Blade set really impacts on its performance, and I don't know why but snipe is always shocking if it's not right. (The repair guy sent back the machine with the setting jig remodelled so that one side of it was reversed...some sort of joke perhaps? He had certainly used it that way!)
I have tried one of the new Jets with the two speed feed, and I want one!!
In the meantime I'm hoping that the Hafco bearings and chain will last much "ronger than the rast ones".
Cheers,
P
:D
bitingmidge
Why are you so impressed with the two speed jet model? I assume you are talking about the 13 inch benchtop model.
Mat,
Reasons I like the machine are (in no particular order):
1) The slower speed and light cut (admittedly on a brand new machine) gave a finish on some ratty pine with grain in all directions, which was close to hand planed......zero tearout.
2) Separate cut-depth indicator as well as finished size gauge, so that it is very easy to see how aggressive the cut is.
3) Blades offset to the rear of the machine making them very accessable for adjustment/replacement. By far the best I've seen in this respect, but I have not had a look at ANY other mid range machine in a long time and they may all be like this now. If they aren't I'm sure they will be before long!
4)Much quieter than my CT machine.
All up, I don't NEED any of the above badly enough to buy one, and won't be replacing my cheapie in the forseeable future, but I'd still have one if Mr Jet was to give me one!
Cheers,
P
I wanted to vote but you forgot to include the "OTHER" category..
Mine also is a CT, but I have had no trouble at all, The only difference it would seem between mine and 'Midge's, is that mine had pre-set disposable double sided blades.. and I have not had to replace any belts or bearings..
Kev ;) :rolleyes: :cool:
jackrus and StevenP - Can you tell us why you gave your machines a "medium" rating?
I to am impressed with the finish of cheapo thicknesers. I recently purchased one (made in china? so should be seen under other branding) for £199 delivered with spare set of blades at local show (SWMTPS chatted the young salesman up).
http://www.charnwood.net/ProductDesc...&stockref=W570
Required to reclaim sawn and salvaged timber, some of which I would be reluctant to pass through a top line fine bladed planner such as the one my son has here in Germany.
(Don't have room for one anyway in current garage/workshop)Very impressed with the finish, in fact a small stool made for grandson from old beech chopping board and parana pine shelving did not even require sanding.
Snipe varies, have not mastered that yet, cut depth, hand pressure at back or front reduces it as does longer melamine board as base.
See pics for Snipe marks (quick job not sanded)
Does what I want, Now have to up the waste material handling to cope with output though.
I have an Ryobi AP13 which I baught as are-worked unit for less than $200,
I find that the only time I get bad results and snipe is when I am slack and don't set up things correctly, support for long stock on outfeed etc.
I predominatly work with hardwoods and lately ran 2" redgum boards that were a retaining wall through the unit without any probs what so ever.
I do remember that Ryobi name so tend to take shallow cuts with more passes. And if you don't have a DC attached to it the feed rollers tend to slip after getting a nice coating of dust.
For the money I payed I can't complain unless it chews the wood up and spits it out at me. :D
Himzo.
Absolutly.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gumby
A thicknesser has been on the wish list for quite a while ( as well as space to put it ) and GMC and some one else I can't remember have started advertising sub$400 models they caught my eye.
How portable are these low end type? Weight?
I would need to take it outside the shed to use it.
Dumbo question, what is snipe?
Mine is 30 KG, not to bad but you feel it a bit if you lift it onto a standard workbench height due to the handles being high up on unit.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jon
Due to lack of space and need to move it for use I have fitted mine on a mobile bench Under my bench saw, not quite so convenient to adjust but as it is not used as often as bench, saw etc. I can live with that.
The tendancy for the wood to be slightly closer to the cutter when it is only pressed down by one of the drive rollers at the start and end of cut. The cutter consequently takes a little more off for the first 2-3 inches or so and the same at the end.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jon
If you look close at the pictures of the stool you will see a faint line about 3" in from each end af the top and on one leg.
( stool was made within an hour to meet a demand from grandson who wanted to help but with the attention span of a 5 yr old. Thicknesser to finish planks, Saw bench to size and router table for edge and mitre planing. Plus a few dowels.)
Chas
I have'nt voted because I have'nt got a bench thicknesser but would be intrigued to ask those of you that have...WHAT IS largest piece of timber that your thicknesser has handled and what was the result of the cut like?
I'm thinking of a smaller thicknesser to cater for small jobs but I wonder how they do handle some robust timber as a comparison amongst them.
Cheers :)
While its possible take 3mm off in 1 pass in pine over a 12" width , you would need to take a lot less off in something like Jarrah. I generally won't take any more than 2mm off in each pass. In very hard timbers I have got down to 1/2mm per pass.
My CT318 could handle 12" Red Ironbark but only 1mm at a time.
My Carbatec CT318 just died. If that model; was still available I would have got another one the same.
So I just got a GMC and am very pleasantly surprised by it.
I dont think it would handle a full 3mm cut 12" wide even in pine, but it doesn't hurt to go down in stages.
Definately is far less likely to snipe than the CT318.
I have thicknessed to 4mm with the GMC whereas the Ct minimum was 6mm.
Thanks Bob, just looking at all options here before making a decision....looked at the poll which dosen't mean a lot cos some folk may put a positive in to cover a negative ie, in that they may have made a bad decision in buying the model they did!
Looking at a second m/c rather than setting up the function on the combination.
Anyway thanks for your input.
Cheers :)
I haven't voted either, because my "orange" MB-1931 is not there.
The next door neighbour has a Ryobi AP13 and I have seen the GMC thicknessers at the local Miter10, Carba-tec's CT-317 in the catalogue as well has H&F's. Except for the colour scheme, they all appear to be identical, as we all know they are built in the same factory, well most of them.
My little "orange neighbour annoyer" has served me well for the past three years. I should add that it cops a lot of abuse (western QLD hardwoods). The original blades didn't last long at all (resharpenable) although I still have them has spares! I have two sets of carbide tipped blades and two of HSS. I use the HSS blades for harder timber like brigalow, myall, sheoak, budgeroo etc and the carbide tipped blades for the rest. The main reason for this (and you are probally thinking that I'm a nutter at the moment!!) is that HSS will "give a bit" if it hits a knot or similar as where the carbide will chip (big $). I have them sharpened locally at very little cost ($10 per HSS set and $15 for the carbide).
My Geetech isn't there either but, being a major manufacturer I am happy with its overall performance, including ease of removing blades to get the crud out, God I hate pine.
Dust extraction work well but there is snipe which can be elimintaed with the use of a melamine board.
Ever heard of a brand called Rhino, thats what mine is. Tis very cheapy but it works enough for what I need ATM...
Up the mighty deWalt, it is a very simple tool to use and if there is a problem there warranty is usually fixed up in a couple of weeks. Don't forget - you always get what you pay for. If you pay for crap, then your end result will be similar.
This poll shows you cannot guage quality by price.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kris.Parker1
The Dewalt had 2 out of 14 rate the machine as medium.
The oft maligned GMC had a perfect score.
:p :p :p :p :p :p :p :p :p :p :p :p :p :p :p :p :p
Maybe the GMC owners had lower expectations ? ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by echnidna
I'm left wondering about the value of this thread. The OP asked "let's see how owners rate their thicknessers in terms of quality output ie smoothness and snipe". To me, this mean't it should be compared to another machine in some way, or an experienced used could look at the quality of the cut and state objectively that the finish on the board was of good or poor quality. Forget the ease of blade adjustment/replacement, colour, noise, etc the machine makes, that is irrelevant to the original question.Quote:
Originally Posted by echnidna
How is the cut and the snipe? I gave the DeWalt a lower grade based on the snipe. I compared it to another equivalent unit I have used (Makita) and it wasn't quite as good. As far as the finish goes, it gives the same quality as the Makita (assuming both have new/sharp blades). If I allow for the fact I can eliminate snipe by technique, then the DW would move up a notch in its rating. I am assuming by all the GMC responses that snipe does not occur on a free-fed board?
I am a bit surprised to see the GMC being compared to the DW based on the results here. How many compared the GMC to another brand's performance? Have the respondents used another machine so they can compare results?
At the end of the day, all machines provide output that still requires finishing. Some will require a plane to finish the piece, others, just a swipe with a scraper. I haven't seen a planer output a piece ready to finish (yet, though the new DW machines may be getting close).
Perhaps comparisons of the planers should revolve around its ability to achieve the end goal first (provide co-planar surfaces that are almost ready to finish) then; safety, speed, cost, noise, blade designs etc.
Out of interest, how would a scientific test be done to answer the original question (only smoothness of cut and snipe)? I'd suggest measuring distance between scallops caused by the blades, depth between ridges, and tearout. Technique would have to be standard i.e. feed in the piece then let it go once the rollers engage. Let it feed through until it fully exits the other side unsupported.
Of course, each new unit would have to be hooked up to a good extraction unit to ensure chips didn't mar the work, and infeed outfeed extension tables would be necessary to provide support, depth of cut standardised at, say, 1mm. Feed rate at whatever the manufacturer recommended. What have I missed - Dean? Anyone?
"I haven't seen a planer output a piece ready to finish (yet, though the new DW machines may be getting close)."
The GMC has the best finish I have ever encountered. It requires minimal sanding or scraping. The finish is so fine that the workload on my widebelt sander has been reduced by at least 75%. This has greatly reduced my production time
In large part this must be due to the blades, but angles, speed etc all play a part.
Snipe is very minimal
My GMC replaced a worn out carbatec and I am experienced with industrial machinery in a commercial production environment.
I didn't expect a lot from the GMC being a low to midend product but it surprised me so I am extremely happy with it.
Based on this polll , I would not consider a Dewalt or CT340 or Ryobi.
As someone who really does not like cheap tools, the GMCs have impressed me with their value for money, and this perhaps is another instance.Quote:
Originally Posted by echnidna
When you say you wouldn't consider DW, I assume you mean the DW733, as some of the new ones provide a much better finish (DW735).
The aim of my post was to draw attention to the responses that were not responding to the original question, which related purely to quality. Your reply was quoted only because it compared the DW and GMC responses which I wanted to point out were not necessarily comparable due to varying perspectives used when responding.
Cheers.