www.KitGuitarsForum.com

Hello All,
I'm about to put the back on my guitar. I'm making a binding jig and would like to know if people favor the LMI routing system of bearings and bits which has ten bits/bearings for about $140. Or, the StewMac system that comes with two choices, one with 9 bearings for $95 and one with 19 bearings for about $140. Do I really need 19 bearings? I will be making other guitars after this one.
Also, LMI has bits they call short shank or long shank. I would think that the long shank would make more sense since there is a lot plastic on the bottom of that router.
Steve

the long shank will do the job.

I have both actually, and find the flexibility of the LMI system a little better. It's really frustrating when you run into a binding/purfling setup that your bearings don't *quite* match. Even with the additional LMI bearings I still end up with an oddball route once in a while.

I use them with the stewmac binding router jig. I had to make the hole in the router base slightly larger to accommodate the LMI bit, as it's slightly larger diameter than the stewmac.

Whether you use long or short is going to depend on your setup (router base depth, etc..), and how much reach you need. I use the longer bit(s) in the stewmac setup.

Steve, what kind of binding system will you be using?

I use this. Only one bearing needed and infinite adjustment,

http://i1224.photobucket.com/albums/ee3 ... G_2588.jpg

I have that too, unfortunately, I don't have a steady enough hand to use it =(

the hand held units may get you started but are finicky . I tried every unit out there. It is a low quality router and a touch set up. The pilot bearings are more accurate and will give consistent results.
You can order jut the cutter and the bearing to start with. You don't need the entire set .

Jim_H wrote:I have that too, unfortunately, I don't have a steady enough hand to use it =(

I'm sorry Jim, either do I. I should have posted the other pic to go along with it. I modified it for this:) I have the cradle to go along with it.

http://i1224.photobucket.com/albums/ee3 ... G_2589.jpg

I built a binding unit that works on the same principle as the one shown. It did ok but I had problems getting the depth right through the waist area. Not exactly sure why but I'm guessing it's because it's difficult to keep the guitar perfectly tangent to the cutter while going around the radius of the waist. Didn't cut too far though........but I cut too far trying correct the cut with a chisel. That makes your day!

I'm leaning toward building another unit that uses a cradel, let's you hold the router in one hand, and keeps the router vertical (whatever they are called). My only reasoning for not building one last time was I didn't won't to purchase the cutter and all the bearings. But I put a lot of time into building the other unit.......and now I'm considering building another one.......so how much did I save? It just seems this method is the most intuitive, doesn't require you to to keep the cutter tangent to the work surface, and is probably quickest as well (see John's video on this). A small mistake on the binding looks amatuerish.......though I admit, non-builders have never noticed if I didn't point it out.

BTW, you can use tape around the perimeter of the side to fine tune the depth of cut per chance you don't have the exact matching bearing for your binding/purfling cut.

I have a different handheld that works the same way with the base indexing on the side. The router bits are not very friendly when the tool tilts to the inside of the guitar. I did have to re-work the purfling scheme on one back. I have successfully use it but I found it so scary I switched to a tower.