Idiot proof binding jig?
Idiot proof binding jig?
Is there any such thing?
-tommy
-tommy
-
- Posts: 1405
- Joined: Fri Sep 03, 2010 2:14 pm
- Location: Creedmoor, NC
Re: Idiot proof binding jig?
Which is yours, Tim?
Or are you using a home made one?
-tommy
Or are you using a home made one?
-tommy
-
- Posts: 794
- Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2009 9:26 pm
- Location: Williams Bay, Wi
- Contact:
-
- Posts: 7011
- Joined: Fri Mar 03, 2006 7:09 pm
- Location: Hegins, Pa
- Contact:
Re: Idiot proof binding jig?
I have been building guitars for about 14 yrs and Binding was the weak point of my building. I can say this Hand held units can be very problematic. You need a system that will remove as many variables in the process as can be.
My first unit was a hand held. It relied on a pilot that was independent of the cutter , this meant the cutter had to be tangent to the center of the cutter and any variance would change the width of cut. The other weak point was keeping the cutter parallel to the side. and lastly keeping the cutter even depth.
On the top it wasn't often that much as the top is reasonable square to the sides the back is the area of most concern. The back is tilted and radiused which throws the cutter all over the place. This is where the donut helps but the side location of riding the sides is still the weak link.
Once you get a system that takes the hand element out of the process the variables drop significantly.
Here is what I used and what I found that did and didn't work
1 Hand units
too many variables for consistent results. They will work best with simple binding but the more complex the binding pattern the more the variability of the process become dominant .
2 router table
These are little better but you have a variable in the depth control. I tried the foam thing and other methods but the body would still rock and the variable in the purfling ledge would have issues with gapping from the ledge varying. It did better than hand units but again the more complex the binding the more hand work to true things up.
3 Tower Unit
This was first designed by Tom Rebekke and it was the first time I have a complex binding work but it took the pilot bearing set to make it work. The carriage allows a finite adjustment of the body in relation to the cutter. This is very critical especially on the back.
4 Fleishman/Williams jig
this has some similarities of the Tower in that the cutter is held perpendicular and is used with the carriage for adjustments.
You have to decide what is important to you.
My first unit was a hand held. It relied on a pilot that was independent of the cutter , this meant the cutter had to be tangent to the center of the cutter and any variance would change the width of cut. The other weak point was keeping the cutter parallel to the side. and lastly keeping the cutter even depth.
On the top it wasn't often that much as the top is reasonable square to the sides the back is the area of most concern. The back is tilted and radiused which throws the cutter all over the place. This is where the donut helps but the side location of riding the sides is still the weak link.
Once you get a system that takes the hand element out of the process the variables drop significantly.
Here is what I used and what I found that did and didn't work
1 Hand units
too many variables for consistent results. They will work best with simple binding but the more complex the binding pattern the more the variability of the process become dominant .
2 router table
These are little better but you have a variable in the depth control. I tried the foam thing and other methods but the body would still rock and the variable in the purfling ledge would have issues with gapping from the ledge varying. It did better than hand units but again the more complex the binding the more hand work to true things up.
3 Tower Unit
This was first designed by Tom Rebekke and it was the first time I have a complex binding work but it took the pilot bearing set to make it work. The carriage allows a finite adjustment of the body in relation to the cutter. This is very critical especially on the back.
4 Fleishman/Williams jig
this has some similarities of the Tower in that the cutter is held perpendicular and is used with the carriage for adjustments.
You have to decide what is important to you.
John Hall
Blues Creek Guitars Inc
Authorized CF Martin Repair Center
president of Association of Stringed Instrument Artisans
http://www.bluescreekguitars.com
Blues Creek Guitars Inc
Authorized CF Martin Repair Center
president of Association of Stringed Instrument Artisans
http://www.bluescreekguitars.com
-
- Posts: 2354
- Joined: Sat Apr 10, 2010 10:50 pm
- Location: Seattle
- Contact:
Re: Idiot proof binding jig?
I used a nice handheld unit from Luther tool, and it could work very well, but one slip, like tilting the router in and the top or back can be toast. It is a very precise tool though.
I used stewmac tower with ok results. Once set in the carriage the router is held square to the side. I liked it because it took up almost no space. The bad is that the router is not counter weighted, so controlling the weight of the router and the carriage was scary. I got ok results, it was easy to mar the sides by pressing the carriage with the instrument into the router too hard.
I recently got a Fleishman binding jig from John and it is a dream to use. It is like having a guided hand held. I can clamp the carriage with the instrument to the table and hold the router while routing the binding channel. Everything is OK under control. It takes a lot more space than the stewmac tower, but it was worth finding the space.
I used stewmac tower with ok results. Once set in the carriage the router is held square to the side. I liked it because it took up almost no space. The bad is that the router is not counter weighted, so controlling the weight of the router and the carriage was scary. I got ok results, it was easy to mar the sides by pressing the carriage with the instrument into the router too hard.
I recently got a Fleishman binding jig from John and it is a dream to use. It is like having a guided hand held. I can clamp the carriage with the instrument to the table and hold the router while routing the binding channel. Everything is OK under control. It takes a lot more space than the stewmac tower, but it was worth finding the space.
-
- Posts: 1405
- Joined: Fri Sep 03, 2010 2:14 pm
- Location: Creedmoor, NC
Re: Idiot proof binding jig?
I'm using a Ribbecke type tower. I think the donut I made is part of the issue. On my second one things got better on my third (one I ordered from JOHN) I'm hoping it will be the charm. Waiting for it to arrive. But I like the tower I have. I have counter balanced it for weight distribution.tommyboy wrote:Which is yours, Tim?
Or are you using a home made one?
-tommy
Tim Benware
-
- Posts: 7011
- Joined: Fri Mar 03, 2006 7:09 pm
- Location: Hegins, Pa
- Contact:
Re: Idiot proof binding jig?
The donut is one of the big keys. The object is all about how the tool locates. Domut should be there soon
John Hall
Blues Creek Guitars Inc
Authorized CF Martin Repair Center
president of Association of Stringed Instrument Artisans
http://www.bluescreekguitars.com
Blues Creek Guitars Inc
Authorized CF Martin Repair Center
president of Association of Stringed Instrument Artisans
http://www.bluescreekguitars.com
-
- Posts: 1405
- Joined: Fri Sep 03, 2010 2:14 pm
- Location: Creedmoor, NC
Re: Idiot proof binding jig?
:)tippie53 wrote:The donut is one of the big keys. The object is all about how the tool locates. Domut should be there soon
Tim Benware