You did well to get your hands on one as they sold out pretty quickly. I [scratch chin] suspect [scratch chin] there was a rush on them after Peter published his excellent in-depth video on them.Mike Goetzke said:My Axminster reamer was delivered today - quicker shipping than Amazon Prime!
Peter Parfitt said:....... Nobody had any idea that the reamer would be so popular.......
Peter
When I was in the military (Seabees), if anyone asked about the tolerance or fit the answer at times “good enough for a government job (government work).” That meant somewhere in the 1/8” with a tolerance of +/- 1/8”. I do agree with you, in the age of cheap digital micrometers and super precise measuring tools and cutting machines the world of WW has evolved into machining wood in some cases? I’m guilty by default.Cheese said:Personally, I think the time has come to embrace the similarity in the machining tolerances of metals with the machining tolerances of wood.
Twenty years ago people in the woodworking industry would exclaim that anything machined within 1/16" to 1/32" is GOOD ENOUGH.
Times have changed, wooden rulers are no longer being used to measure critical dimensions, bad Stanley tape measures are no longer being viewed as the arbiter of precise dimensions. People are using knee mills and CNC machines to machine wood and they consistently rely on +/- of .001" tolerances for inlays.
We've rounded the corner and that's a good thing.
Sure, wood expands with humidity but aluminum and plastic expand with temperature and from a manufacturing consistency standpoint, we've been able to successfully gather that in within the last 15 years.
The future will embrace this new method of thought, and the biggest break-throughs will be with the folks that strive to achieve +/- .015" in wood rather than those that say 1/16" is good enough. 1/16" is good enough for framing...but not much else for fine woodworking.
This reamer thread is a great example, the reamers people are exploring are machine tools developed for the metal fabrication industry. The cross-over is astounding.
mkasdin said:When I was in the military (Seabees), if anyone asked about the tolerance or fit the answer at times “good enough for a government job (government work).” That meant somewhere in the 1/8” with a tolerance of +/- 1/8”. I do agree with you, in the age of cheap digital micrometers and super precise measuring tools and cutting machines the world of WW has evolved into machining wood in some cases? I’m guilty by default.
I just recently started buying Festool equipment and decided to build an MFT. I own an Avid CNC which is a great piece of equipment. Having stated that, a CNC is only accurate when you have it calibrated to the accuracy required for your work. Mine is calibrated down to 1/64" which is good for most of my. I don't have the equipment to calibrate to 0.001". I cut a test MFT top with 6 rows of holes in both X & Y axsis. Tools that used 2 adjacent dog holes was passible however tools like the TSO Triangle that are dogged across multiple holes caused problems. If your cnc is off 0.001 of in accuracy, that multiplies across a number of holes.Peter Parfitt said:mkasdin said:When I was in the military (Seabees), if anyone asked about the tolerance or fit the answer at times “good enough for a government job (government work).” That meant somewhere in the 1/8” with a tolerance of +/- 1/8”. I do agree with you, in the age of cheap digital micrometers and super precise measuring tools and cutting machines the world of WW has evolved into machining wood in some cases? I’m guilty by default.
Yes, I have used "Close enough for government work" a few times in my videos.
The great thing about better precision (and as this is a Parf Guide thread) is the ability to cut things accurately, especially square, as everything then comes together so easily. Also, repeat cuts tend to be identical rather than - close enough for government work.
Cheers.
Peter
Wood_Slice said:Using the fostner bit is there a way to make sure the bottom is chip free/no tear out without having a backer board underneath it? Should I slow or speed up the bits turning motion. Drill with pressure downwards slower?
Wood_Slice said:Using the fostner bit is there a way to make sure the bottom is chip free/no tear out without having a backer board underneath it? Should I slow or speed up the bits turning motion. Drill with pressure downwards slower?
Wood_Slice said:Using the fostner bit is there a way to make sure the bottom is chip free/no tear out without having a backer board underneath it? Should I slow or speed up the bits turning motion. Drill with pressure downwards slower?
cubevandude said:I set the jig so it just drills about 3mm and do one side, then flip it over and drill it right through on the other side. Its more work, but stops and chipout.