Just Installed Colliflower Cube

[Coen]

You can replace the insert for a higher one.

But darn... the holder for that insert is 200 bucks :O?

I justify the price by knowing the machining that must have gone into the aluminum fence base. The fit on the part took precision machining, so they can’t be cheap to produce for a small shop. Were they purchasing the parts from China, that would be a different story.

Yeah valid point. It's not a mass produced item either.

It somewhat amazes me that the brands themselves don't incorporate such features into the saw. Like Festool ultimately got a deal (?) with TSO to copy their GRS 16 PE.

 

[ChuckM]

[member=44099]Cheese[/member]

How thick is your aux fence? And what bolts are used?

I use double-faced tape because the fence is thin. I'd prefer bolts.

 

[ChuckM]

Snip
It somewhat amazes me that the brands themselves don't incorporate such features into the saw. Snip

Festool obviously pays attention to after-market innovations, but it has to be careful with what improved features to adopt. For example, I am not convinced that the Cube will not impact on the dust collection.

Based on the two dust collection videos the seller put on YouTube (the original Cube), it very much does as shown in his videos (but he said the difference wasn't significant...because he made only three test cuts. If you repeated that enough times (who makes only three cuts in a typical woodworking project? Last time, I made 60+ cuts on the Kapex), you'd probably see a huge pile of dust behind the saw because of the Cube. In fact, if you look closely, you'd see a plume of dust shooting out in the Cube video, while that same plume of dust was captured by the rubber boot in the other video.

Dust collection is a big selling point for the Kapex. Festool would be careful of not killing that before adding any accessory to the saw.

 

[Cheese]

[member=44099]Cheese[/member]

How thick is your aux fence? And what bolts are used?

I use double-faced tape because the fence is thin. I'd prefer bolts.

[member=57948]ChuckS[/member] , the ply is 9 mm thick and I used M5 stainless flatheads through-bolted.

[attachimg=1]

Here's a comparison of the early vs later Colliflower ZC insert. In the new version the aluminum surround is machined at the sides/end so that you can slip a small screwdriver under the pvc insert and pull it right out.

[attachimg=2]

 

[smorgasbord]

I do the same thing Chuck, that's the reason I never really considered installing the Cube.

The problem with wood faces just screwed to the metal fence is that as they get eaten up, either by repeated usage or by different angles and bevels, you have a replacement problem. With inserts, you just slide in a new one, often tool-lessly.

[member=44099]Cheese[/member]

How thick is your aux fence? And what bolts are used?

I use double-faced tape because the fence is thin. I'd prefer bolts.

I use these flat-head bolts:
[attachimg=1]
Which, when recessed in a ½" hole look like this:
[attachimg=2]

For my router table fence, they thread into T-nuts in the aluminum extrusion, so it's an easy matter to loosen them a half turn or so and slide the face left or right. When you go through a hole in the miter saw fence, you can't go that. You either have to machine a groove in the wooden face, or drill a new hole.

I also have the old-style Colliflower ZCI plate. I think of it more as a convenience thing rather than a splinter prevention thing. After all, track saw users don't have a ZCI underneath what they're cutting, unless you count the insulation board some use to save their tabletop/floor.

I really, personally, don't like the  sacrificial wood faces screwed to the metal fences approach - be there done that, and over it. Not only do you have the replacement problem when the zero clearance is no longer zero, when you bevel you have to remove screws so that you can slide the metal fence part away and still have sacrificial wood supporting the cut. I suppose one could keep the metal fences slid away full-time and rely on the wood faces for support, but no-one seems to do that. Finally, unless you're doing the latest miter saw fad of having your length stops in the table instead of on a fence, the thickness of the sacrificial wood means you have to have your fence extension at the same level or the flip stop won't reach. That's what I originally did with my save and Incra fence, but like I said, it was a constant pain.

 

[ChuckM]

Snip. After all, track saw users don't have a ZCI underneath what they're cutting, unless you count the insulation board some use to save their tabletop/floor.Snip.

With a track saw, the blade spins upwards, so there's no need for any ZC support on the bottom of the board.

 

[ChuckM]

Snip
Finally, unless you're doing the latest miter saw fad of having your length stops in the table instead of on a fence, Snip

That's a fad? I don't watch too many miter saw videos.

Have been using the stop block (blue arrow) on the table/stand (red) since owning the Kapex EB (9 years ago):

[attachimg=1]

 

[smorgasbord]

With a track saw, the blade spins upwards, so there's no need for any ZC support on the bottom of the board.

I think they both spin upwards:
[attachimg=1]  [attachimg=2]

If anything, the track saw has the guide's splinter guard on top, which miter saws don't have.

 

[smorgasbord]

Snip
Finally, unless you're doing the latest miter saw fad of having your length stops in the table instead of on a fence, Snip

That's a fad? I don't watch too many miter saw videos.
Have been using the stop block (blue arrow) on the table/stand (red) since owning the Kapex EB (9 years ago):

The fad is to embed a track of some kind in the support table and have flip stops that flip up out of the table. Like these:

[attachimg=1] [attachimg=2]

For some reason, some people think having a fence is problematic, but I don't get that at all.

 

[ChuckM]

With a track saw, the blade spins upwards, so there's no need for any ZC support on the bottom of the board.

I think they both spin upwards:
[attachimg=1]  [attachimg=2]

If anything, the track saw has the guide's splinter guard on top, which miter saws don't have.

Not the same. The track saw blade enters the wood from the edge of the lumber (unless it's a plunge cut) and hence there's no worry of splinters on the bottom of the board, while that's not always the case on the miter saw, where a ZCI on the miter saw will help.

 

[ChuckM]

Snip.

The fad is to embed a track of some kind in the support table and have flip stops that flip up out of the table. Like these:

[attachimg=1] [attachimg=2]

For some reason, some people think having a fence is problematic, but I don't get that at all.

That Woodpecker design is clever, but it'd be better if the stops could be controlled tool-lessly. The hex key approach is not ideal.

About the fence, if a long board is not completely straight end to end, the cut made on the board butted against a long fence (on both sides of the miter saw) might not be square . A short fence -- for example, the one that comes with the miter saw, could still deliver a square end.

 

[smorgasbord]

Not the same. The track saw blade enters the wood from the edge of the lumber (unless it's a plunge cut) and hence there's no worry of splinters on the bottom of the board, while that's not always the case on the miter saw, where a ZCI on the miter saw will help.

OK, I'll grant that we're more likely to have a plunge cut on a miter saw than a track saw, or at least for a longer percentage of the cut. But, there are tricks one can do (do a scribe climb cut on the top of the stock first) to reduce that as well on the sliding miter saw.

About the fence, if a long board is not completely straight end to end, the cut made on the board butted against a long fence (on both sides of the miter saw) might not be square . A short fence -- for example, the one that comes with the miter saw, could still deliver a square end.

Yeah, I've heard that, but I don't get it. What good is a square end if the length isn't straight? And, if you really wanted that for some reason (I'd like to hear that reason), it's a simple matter to place a piece of scrap against the fence for the spot on which you want the square registration to occur.

That Woodpecker design is clever, but it'd be better if the stops could be controlled tool-lessly. The hex key approach is not ideal.

I agree 100%. It's easy to have thumbscrews/knobs when you have a flip stop on a fence, but not so easy when a track is embedded in a table. It's literally trading off something that doesn't matter (square ends on not straight stock) for something that does matter (having convenient flip stops).

 

[ChuckM]

Snip.

Yeah, I've heard that, but I don't get it. What good is a square end if the length isn't straight? And, if you really wanted that for some reason (I'd like to hear that reason), it's a simple matter to place a piece of scrap against the fence for the spot on which you want the square registration to occur.
Snip.

Whenever we deal with construction lumber that we need to square one end first.

My "fence-less" Kapex handled the lumber for this project really well:

[attachimg=1]    [attachimg=2]

 

[smorgasbord]

Whenever we deal with construction lumber that we need to square one end first.

My "fence-less" Kapex handled the lumber for this project really well:

Sorry, I don't get that at all. Take the stretcher there. You want that horizontal and you want the two ends to be parallel to each other and perpendicular to the basic length of the stretcher. Assuming I didn't want to bother jointing the length of the stretcher first, I'd lay the stretcher piece against a long fence and cut it square.

Think about a board that's kind of straight, and then takes a turn on the last foot. Squaring up to that last foot doesn't do any good.

 

[ChuckM]

Hope this not-to-scale sketch will help you understand why the absence of a long fence makes the job of squaring the end of a 2x4 easier during the stock preparation phase:

[attachimg=1]

When we work with hardwood, we usually go through the basic steps of flattening, jointing and whatnot, and so it doesn't present the problems construction lumber does. Of course, one can true the 2x4, etc. on a jointer, dimension it on the thickness planer and table saw, but that's not how we commonly handle and use construction lumber. At least not how woodworkers I know here do it.

 

[ChuckM]

snip

[member=57948]ChuckS[/member] , the ply is 9 mm thick and I used M5 stainless flatheads through-bolted.snip.

Thx. Mine is only 6mm (I try to minimize the loss of the cutting capacity), so those bolts might not work.

 

[smorgasbord]

Hope this not-to-scale sketch will help you understand why the absence of a long fence makes the job of squaring the end of a 2x4 easier during the stock preparation phase:

I guess I'm slow, because I don't get it. This is what I think happens with a bowed 2x4 when you cut the ends with a long fence and with a short fence:
[attachimg=1]

If this were the stretcher, I'd want the version cut with the long fence so the ends are "vertical" for mating into the legs, whether I'm using pocket screws of dominos.

 

[ChuckM]

Let me give it one more shot with the following diagram (I'll leave it at that, if it still doesn't work for you).

Note that the 2x4 was not to be used in its full length, but cross cut to shorter lengths for the workbench table. If one end of the 2x4 was squared on a long fence and then cut to the desired length, the second end would be square to the long fence, but not to the mating surface.

[attachimg=1]

 

[smorgasbord]

Let me give it one more shot with the following diagram (I'll leave it at that, if it still doesn't work for you).

Note that the 2x4 was not to be used in its full length, but cross cut to shorter lengths for the workbench table. If one end of the 2x4 was squared on a long fence and then cut to the desired length, the second end would be square to the long fence, but not to the mating surface.

I understand what you're saying, but the technique doesn't work for me. Unless your pieces are only a foot long, it's not going to work any better, and probably worse. Think about a 4' long bowed board with a 1' long fence. At least with the long fence, you can measure the offset from the fence at both the cutting end and 4' down, making them the same, but with the short fence, you're still getting an end that isn't perpendicular to the basic length of the board. And with the longer fence, you can simply make 2 cuts - one to cut to rough length, and then place that piece against the long fence to get the proper end, as my diagram above shows. With the short fence, you're always rolling the dice, at least in my view.

 

[dlu]

[member=77266]smorgasbord[/member], your adaption of the Incra fence to the Kapex is brilliant. I wish I'd thought of that before getting my Cube -- the big thing that I don't like about the Cube (and the stock Kapex fence) is how far my Incra fence ends up away from the blade.