SEARCH FINESCALE.COM

Enter keywords or a search phrase below:

Revell Yacht America

25515 views
174 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    August 2008
Posted by tankerbuilder on Wednesday, June 10, 2015 1:26 PM

I am sorry to say . At this time I am not following this thread any-more . Why ? Well first G-Mo you gets a model I have never owned , but wanted to and second your work so far is so good it gave me heartburn ! Gees ! guy she's gorgeous .Yes , I'm still stayin till the "Bitter " end .T.B. Just Kiddin about the rest

  • Member since
    September 2012
Posted by GMorrison on Wednesday, June 10, 2015 4:16 PM

 Modeling is an excuse to buy books.

 

  • Member since
    September 2009
  • From: Miami, FL
Posted by Felix C. on Thursday, June 11, 2015 8:18 AM

When considering the quality workmanship required for these [sailing ship] kits plus painting skills it is amazing they were originally intended for kids.  Young folk must have been so much smarter than now in the 50s,60s,70s Or were they?

  • Member since
    July 2014
Posted by modelcrazy on Thursday, June 11, 2015 8:25 AM

GM

Glad you bumped this thread back up and started working on her again. I've always liked the America, and have the wood version of the kit, which has been setting around for years, at about the stage your at now. I am anxious to watch you continue on her. Keep it coming man.

Steve

Steve

Building a kit from your stash is like cutting a head off a Hydra, two more take it's place.

 

 

http://www.spamodeler.com/forum/

  • Member since
    March 2005
Posted by philo426 on Thursday, June 11, 2015 12:18 PM

The wood decks make a world of difference!

  • Member since
    August 2008
Posted by tankerbuilder on Friday, June 12, 2015 8:43 AM

Well ;

     As I said , I am going to stay till the bitter end . G , That work is mighty fine . I think you are someone I would like to talk to about this stuff in person  .What a job ! T.B.

  • Member since
    July 2010
  • From: Tempe AZ
Posted by docidle on Saturday, June 13, 2015 10:17 PM

Looks beautiful Bill.

       

 

 

  • Member since
    September 2012
Posted by GMorrison on Tuesday, June 16, 2015 12:08 AM

I'm quite happy to have the attention of you all. I need to learn as I go.

Sunday I cut out and assembled the cockpit. I don't have a picture, but I made the coaming (verticals) out of scribed basswood that I steamed. The circle cutting operation for the bench and cap went surprisingly well.

 Modeling is an excuse to buy books.

 

  • Member since
    September 2012
Posted by GMorrison on Tuesday, June 16, 2015 12:12 AM

Next I made the cap rails for the deck. I can't bend wood for the life of me, so I usually do this by cutting the curved shapes out of wide pieces. The obvious negative is that the grain is off and I have to gauge the width, but I'm comfortable with it. An old trick from a Model Shipways kit way back when.

 Modeling is an excuse to buy books.

 

  • Member since
    September 2012
Posted by GMorrison on Tuesday, June 16, 2015 12:16 AM

On to the bowsprit. If I didn't say so before, I'm working from the Blue Jacket plan set and instruction book, not scaling the kit parts.

BTW you can see the rails cut and installed so far, from the previous post.

 Modeling is an excuse to buy books.

 

  • Member since
    July 2014
Posted by modelcrazy on Tuesday, June 16, 2015 9:03 AM

Fantastic work GM!

Steve

Building a kit from your stash is like cutting a head off a Hydra, two more take it's place.

 

 

http://www.spamodeler.com/forum/

  • Member since
    September 2012
Posted by GMorrison on Thursday, June 18, 2015 12:16 AM

I spent a couple of hours this morning with brass stock, drills and needle files, then a couple of hours this evening with the soldering iron, to put this together.

Thank you Blue Jacket Shipcrafters

 Modeling is an excuse to buy books.

 

  • Member since
    June 2003
  • From: Cavite, Philippines
Posted by allan on Thursday, June 18, 2015 2:45 AM

Absolutely awe-inspiring work.  Such a pleasure going through the pages of this thread.

No bucks, no Buck Rogers

  • Member since
    July 2014
Posted by modelcrazy on Thursday, June 18, 2015 10:26 AM

allan
Absolutely awe-inspiring work.  Such a pleasure going through the pages of this thread.

Agreed Yes

Steve

Building a kit from your stash is like cutting a head off a Hydra, two more take it's place.

 

 

http://www.spamodeler.com/forum/

  • Member since
    September 2012
Posted by GMorrison on Friday, June 19, 2015 4:40 PM

I've finished the installation of the bowsprit. Getting the bitts installed was fiddly, I'll take a different approach with the next schooner by mortising the spar BEFORE gluing it to the hull!

Spent some time doing a better job of finishing the opening for the cockpit, which is a separate assembly not shown here.

And stained the deck and installed the rails. Those need some final shaping refinishing and varnish. I am quite happy with the deck planking.

Thank you all for following along and for your comments.

I am learning a lot as I go, hopefully when I start the Elsie it will be a little smoother.

 Modeling is an excuse to buy books.

 

  • Member since
    May 2008
  • From: Wyoming Michigan
Posted by ejhammer on Saturday, June 20, 2015 9:44 AM

Beautiful work. Following closely as I too have Elsie in my stash. Just finished my Chesapeake Bay Flattie. Rigged it, but with no sails.

Nice job on the cap iron. I find making metal fittings very satisfying.

EJ

Completed - 1/525 Round Two Lindberg repop of T2A tanker done as USS MATTAPONI, USS ESSEX 1/700 Hasegawa Dec 1942, USS Yorktown 1/700 Trumpeter 1943. In The Yards - USS ESSEX 1/700 Hasegawa 1945, USS ESSEX 1/700 Dragon 1944, USS ESSEX 1/700 Trumpeter 1945, USS ESSEX 1/540 Revell (vintage) 1962, USS ESSEX 1/350 Trumpeter 1942, USS ESSEX LHD-2 as commissioned, converted from USS Wasp kit Gallery Models. Plus 35 other plastic and wood ship kits.

  • Member since
    September 2012
Posted by GMorrison on Saturday, June 20, 2015 10:02 AM

Thanks much.

Me too, it's a new thing. Kind of disappointed there aren't many more on this boat.

Got out the Elsie set last night. My there is a LOT of mechanical hardware.

Your Flattie is what inspired me to get this back out and finish it. Thank you!

These things have a way of piling up a milion "coulda/ shoulda" thoughts, but life moves forward. One thing is that Revell made the bulwarks about half as high as they should be, The bowsprit is scale from plans, but the cap rails should go across the top of it.

John Tilley often comments that it's probably easier to build a hull from scratch than to modify something in plastic, which he concluded I think after his Bounty. I'd have to agree, so I really look forward to Elsie.

 Modeling is an excuse to buy books.

 

  • Member since
    May 2008
  • From: Wyoming Michigan
Posted by ejhammer on Saturday, June 20, 2015 11:33 AM

Yup, I'm taking flattie to the local model contest (Pasta & Plastics) today. Will be posting the last of the build on the Flattie thread maybe tomorrow. I really had fun with it.

EJ

Completed - 1/525 Round Two Lindberg repop of T2A tanker done as USS MATTAPONI, USS ESSEX 1/700 Hasegawa Dec 1942, USS Yorktown 1/700 Trumpeter 1943. In The Yards - USS ESSEX 1/700 Hasegawa 1945, USS ESSEX 1/700 Dragon 1944, USS ESSEX 1/700 Trumpeter 1945, USS ESSEX 1/540 Revell (vintage) 1962, USS ESSEX 1/350 Trumpeter 1942, USS ESSEX LHD-2 as commissioned, converted from USS Wasp kit Gallery Models. Plus 35 other plastic and wood ship kits.

  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: Greenville, NC
Posted by jtilley on Saturday, June 20, 2015 11:46 AM

GM, what's the scale of the Revell kit?

Thomas Graham's history of Revell says 1/56. I'm not sure how much to trust that figure, but it seems about right.

Bluejacket sells two America kits, one on 1/96 scale and one on 1/48.

I don't want to insult anybody's intelligence, but did you rescale the BJ plans to match the scale of the model? I have to admit I'd been thinking that in the last several posts the bowsprit looked kind of heavy. Maybe the problem is, as you said, that Revell just plain botched the height of the bulwarks. But a 1/48 bowsprit on a 1/56 model would look just about like that. Again, I don't want to insult anybody's intelligence. But this is the sort of goof that can arise because a modeler is staring so intently at the model that the eye misses the obvious. I wouldn't want to try to count the number of times that's happened to me.

The decks look terrific. Did you wind up using holly for the planks, or are we looking at basswood?

The drawings in the old Model Shipways Elsie (which now, of course, is off the market) are, quite simply, the best I've seen in a ship model kit. (I know there are some equally good ones out there, but I haven't seen any better ones myself.) The fittings aren't bad (though the windlass is a stock fitting, and doesn't quite match the one on the plans).

I'm currently working on a "personalized" version of it. Mine is going to be an exact scale model of the schooner G.L. Tilley, named after my father. (No such ship ever existed, of course, but I'm not going to let that intimidate me in the least.) I do recommend getting rid of the wood blocks that come with the kit; they're pretty crude. (The deadeyes are much better.) Superior blocks can be had from Bluejacket, or from Syren Ship Model Company. Syren's wood blocks are superb; Bluejacket's are cast metal, and the "iron stropped" ones look right for an early-twentieth-century schooner.

I've been snapping in-progress photos of this one, but I'm not going to start posting them till I'm more confident that I'm not going to screw up something important. At the moment I'm working on the quarterdeck planking which is tricky because the planks, instead of running parallel to the centerline, run parallel to the sides of the deckhouse.

Good luck.

Youth, talent, hard work, and enthusiasm are no match for old age and treachery.

  • Member since
    September 2012
Posted by GMorrison on Sunday, June 21, 2015 12:22 AM

Two posts in reply.

First, no umbrage taken whatsoever. In fact I had the pleasure of driving to the seashore today with Ms. Morrison, to go on an historic home tour. Architect of 35 years- it never grows old. One by Wright, one by an apprentice, one by Julia Morgan, and among several others one by the eccentric ship parts collector Allen Knight. Ok, a third post...

Two hours each way on the road gave me a chance to clear out some cobwebs and reconsider the bowsprit situation.

I didn't exactly bungle the scale, althought there's some truth in that. When I set out to do this build, I bought the 1/48 scale plans from Blue Jacket, their instruction book, and some 1/16" strip basswood deck material. The drawings are good, attributed to consultation from Chappelle. Sketchy fuzzy a little. The book is for a POF build, but it's a pretty good primer on the subject.

Determining Revell's scale was idiosyncratic, i.e. peculiar to the subject. Waist, waterline overall beam, take your pick. I gave it some thought and decided that what mattered and what probably would be the most apparent thing would be to match the only two parallel lines on the boat (decking excluded)- the mast centerlines. I find a sidetrip into metric measurements (why, why why don't we?) is useful for scaling. Something my calculator can understand. BJ drawings 195mm. Revell 143mm. Which gave me a conversion factor, applied to 1/48, for a resultant scale of 1/65 (actually slightly smaller, at 65.33 but let's not mix decimals into fractions and go completely insane.

Architects and boatbuilders in the English system rejoice! A fine scale of 1/64. Somewhere Frank is smiling...

Now to the matter at hand. The spars on this boat are curiously big. I can't say why, although half a dozen explanations come to mind. But I would like to learn.

The replica is of course just that, and it's different in a lot of ways, but it does seem to match up with the BJ drawings in regards to the masts pretty well. At the deck, BJ tells us that the diameter is 21". Learned a new term too- "bury". That part of the mast from the deck down to the step. Tapers too.

They are thick. The bowsprit spar is 18" square at its bitt end. BJ says buy a piece of 3/8" square wood. So after some consideration, I bought a piece of 5/16" square, the next choice being 1/4". In other words, the choice was 20" or 16". Of small things like that, problems compound. That's my scale error. Lesson learned and summary conclusion #1 made. I will post all of those presently, if anyone is still reading.

When I made the plan to plank the deck with wood strips, I took some effort to lower the mounting lugs in the hull for the deck, by the thickness of the added wood. In addition I scraped off all of the inside bulwark detail in preparation for new timber heads and a waterway. But, my mistake- I should have set those mounting lugs from the BJ bulwarks drawings and scaled the dimension, which is 24" at the peak. Revell gave us 16", which I faithfully replicated. Which leads me to summary conclusion #2. Anyone not yet asleep?

And last, at installation time, I neglected to test fit the spar, which is meant to be flush to the deck, and it had a slight upward rake relative to the deck caused by the notch in the peak being even shallower than 16" top to bottom. I will not share a potential summary conclusion #3 as it's embarrassing.

Having sorted through all that, it gives me a plan for a solution. Even with all of that fancy looking doweling, it snapped off pretty quickly the moment I walked in the door, fed the dog and put down the mail. Onward!

I would not be posting this if I didn't expect and want observations and help. It looked wrong to me too.

 Modeling is an excuse to buy books.

 

  • Member since
    November 2005
  • From: Formerly Bryan, now Arlington, Texas
Posted by CapnMac82 on Sunday, June 21, 2015 12:46 AM

America was also known for having a stumpy 'sprit, too.  Recall she was originally fit with a jib boom, which was carried away during an Atlantic crossing.  Rhe rig was found handy enough and kept.

(That fore staysail boom still gives me the willies, though.(

  • Member since
    September 2012
Posted by GMorrison on Sunday, June 21, 2015 12:57 AM

Oh listen, I'm currently sticking pad eyes all over the deck including those that are to lash down the boats.

The willies? Lash me to the mast.

I do plan to include the jib boom. The foremast staysail boom I don't think is in the BJ drawings.

 Modeling is an excuse to buy books.

 

  • Member since
    September 2012
Posted by GMorrison on Sunday, June 21, 2015 1:03 AM

Summary conclusions.

#1 I really need a good little table saw. Any suggestions gladly accepted. I like my fingers, so I need a good sharp accurate easy to use one.

Bosch? DeWalt? Dremel? As I say I will gladly spend $ 500 if it keeps my moneymakers attached to my arms.

#2 I am never ever going to convert a plastic model again. This was a good one, but even then to do it right I should have gone over it with the BJ drawings in detail. But really why? From plans from now on.

#3 It seems sometimes that there's never time to do it right, but I always manage to find time to do it over.... Lesson learned.

 Modeling is an excuse to buy books.

 

  • Member since
    September 2012
Posted by GMorrison on Sunday, June 21, 2015 1:19 AM

And regards the Elsie. The drawings really are works of art. Done with a Rapidograph I am sure. I love a good drawing, one that is thoughtfully composed with the idea of conveying the nature of the object to the reader.

I was fortunate to get a kit in the old yellow box, with the complete set of newer and addendum drawings included. I think I only got two dories- that's a problem except that the other six don't have innards so there's a chance I can build a stack (two stacks).

Dr. Tilley I really look forward to your G.L.T. I had looked at the planking plans for the kit and understand the issues. Are you using the scribed sheet material?

 Modeling is an excuse to buy books.

 

  • Member since
    November 2005
  • From: Formerly Bryan, now Arlington, Texas
Posted by CapnMac82 on Sunday, June 21, 2015 1:23 AM

Check the MicroMark catalog, they have two table-top t/s, one spendy, one less so.  Like most t/s, the expense is in the blades and accessories.

If you examine the BJ detail you posted here, it koted the gooseneck for the jibsaill boom.

These are evil beasts/. The weight limits how far over the tack of the staysail can go.  Being a boom, they need a topping lift--as if the foremast need any more tackle to bring to the deck.  If you luf the staysail, that boom heaves about willy-nillu uncaring as to whose legs it hazards.  Ok, so, you get the benefit of hands-free tacking.  But at all those other costs.  That, and the limit that the staysaill triangle cannot overlap the foremast as all.

The replica has one, buy only  on the staysail proper, and not the jib.

  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: Greenville, NC
Posted by jtilley on Sunday, June 21, 2015 4:06 AM

I'm most definitely not a math whiz. I learned the hard way, a long time ago, that the fewer math problems I had to work when working on a model, the better.

When I'm starting a new model, the first thing I do is to get my hands onto a complete copy of the plans, reduced or enlarged to the scale of the model. (I did the same thing in the days when I was making ship drawings.) Two reasons: one, it eliminates all sorts of opportunities for errors, and two, I find it much easier to visualize what I'm doing if I have a picture of everything at model size.

When I started my little model of the frigate Hancock, back in 1977, I ordered a set of the Chapelle drawings from the Smithsonian. They were huge things, on 1/4"=1' scale. I'd decided the model would be on 3/32"=i'. So, after getting advice from my old man, the architecture professor, I took them to an architectural blueprinting firm. Those folks took photos of the drawings with a humongous camera, and made blueprints for me on 3/32"=1' scale. Now I had a nice set of plans from which I could take measurements directly.

I had the blueprint guys make me thirty copies or so. When it came time to carve the hull, I stuck sections of those prints to cardstock and cut them out to make templates. And whenever I wanted to use a drawing from some other source, I'd get a copy of it to the model scale as well.

As I remember, that whole print job (including the blueprints from the Smithsonian) cost about seventy bucks - a very significant sum for a starving grad student. Nowadays it's much simpler and cheaper. The architectural supply places (the term "blueprint" is almost obsolete now) have photocopy machines that can make prints at any scale you like in a few minutes, for small change. My guess is that an architectural print shop could make a copy of the Bluejacket plans at any scale you want for less than $5.00 - while you wait. (Just don't ask the dealer to sell you a rapidograph. He won't know what the word means.)

Once I've got at least one copy on the scale of the model, I make lots of copies of selected parts of it on that wonderful, miraculous gadget, the home printer. The Epson one I've got can make prints at any ration from 25% to 200% - and the reproduction will be proportionally right. (In the early days of Xerox, that wasn't the case. I found that out the hard way.) For my current project, I hardly touch the plans that came from the kit; I work almost entirely from 8 1/2" x 11" copies made on the printer. (Lots of Ronnberg's scrap views are on a larger scale. I can reduce them to 1/8"=1' in a few seconds. I'm lucky in one respect: my model building desk is in the same room as the computer and printer.

If you've got a set of plans on the model's scale, all sorts of problems just disappear. (Never mind what the actual and scale dimensions of the bowsprit are; just use dividers to take them from the plans.) But I do have a calculator that works in feet, inches, and fractions, and can do metric/English conversions. I got it at Lowe's for about $15.00. That eliminates some more sources of potential error.

I'm planking the decks of my little schooner with 1/32" x 1/16" basswood strips. (I'd use holly, but I don't have access to the saw to make narrow strips at the moment.) I'm not a fan of scribed sheets; the grooves are just too big. For the quarterdeck of the G.L. Tilley, some of the planks have to be tapered, and a few of the outboard ones need to be nibbed into the waterway strakes. The Ronnberg drawings show the basic principle - but I'm not following them slavishly because I'm not building the Elsie. The G.L. Tilley was different from the Elsie in lots off respects.

I've tried both Micromark table saws. I strongly recommend the more expensive one, if you can handle the finances. (Your Significant Other is likely to have something to say about that.) The little, cheaper one just isn't as precise, or as powerful. And the speed isn't adjustable, and the arbor doesn't tilt, and the fence is almost useless. The bigger saw now comes with digital readout, which makes it even better. And at the moment it's on sale: http://www.micromark.com/microlux-digital-table-saw,11530.html .

It's worth noting that a lot of serious modelers use the "Byrnes Table Saw": http://www.byrnesmodelmachines.com/tablesaw.html . It unquestionably gives excellent results, but I can't see that it offers any big advantages over the larger Micromark version.

I believe the America set a "club-footed" fore staysail - like the Elsie (and like the America replica in the picture). I'm sure the rigging was a little different, but the principle is the same. If Bluejacket says it wasn't there, though, I'll take that as fact. I was working at the Mariners' Museum when BJ was working on that kit. I remember digging through the museum's various plans of her - including a sail plan drawn by none other than Donald McKay (when she was in his yard for a refit). The MM has lots of neat stuff related to that ship, including the quarterdeck skylight and a half model that was presented by George Steers to Queen Victoria.

Youth, talent, hard work, and enthusiasm are no match for old age and treachery.

  • Member since
    May 2008
  • From: Wyoming Michigan
Posted by ejhammer on Sunday, June 21, 2015 10:11 AM

Following this with interest.  

GMorrison

Summary conclusions.

#1 I really need a good little table saw. Any suggestions gladly accepted. I like my fingers, so I need a good sharp accurate easy to use one.

Bosch? DeWalt? Dremel? As I say I will gladly spend $ 500 if it keeps my moneymakers attached to my arms.

#2 I am never ever going to convert a plastic model again. This was a good one, but even then to do it right I should have gone over it with the BJ drawings in detail. But really why? From plans from now on.

#3 It seems sometimes that there's never time to do it right, but I always manage to find time to do it over.... Lesson learned.

 

Amen to all of the above. A common thought for me is "Man, I really should have ----"

I own two contractors table saws, both of which are over 40 years old and have been used and used in my business for all those years. I also have all my digits, all of which are over 73 years old. The primary thing with these full sized saws is - safety - safety - safety. Always be aware of what you are doing and never place yourself in a position of being distracted. I am able to cut woods as small as 3/32" square by using various fixtures made for the purpose of controlling the work piece and keeping my hand away from the blade. The small modelers saws are nicer to store and waste less wood because the kerf is thinner, but though smaller, can cause serious injuries. You don't have to cut very deep to sever tendons or bone. Fingers don't have much meat (although mine rather look like fat sausages, complicating rigging procedures). Injuries occur mostly when it seems to be expedient to make a cut without first taking the time to fixture the job correctly. Most of the wood sizes I use seem to be pretty standard, so I only have to build a particular fixture once, then mark it and save it for next time. There is always the option to jig up for a specially sized piece that is unavailable commercially. Another fixture is one for my drill press, making it a very efficient thickness sander. Works great for making that oversized standard size down to the custom size I want, or, to just make planking nice and smooth and of consistent thickness with no saw marks. All this gives me the ability to make my own lumber, when I want it, as I need it, the way I want it, from chunks of wood that are in my wood stash or readily available - black walnut, mahogany, cherry, pine, basswood, poplar, chunks of exotic hardwoods from flooring etc.

Thanks for posting your build.

 

EJ

Completed - 1/525 Round Two Lindberg repop of T2A tanker done as USS MATTAPONI, USS ESSEX 1/700 Hasegawa Dec 1942, USS Yorktown 1/700 Trumpeter 1943. In The Yards - USS ESSEX 1/700 Hasegawa 1945, USS ESSEX 1/700 Dragon 1944, USS ESSEX 1/700 Trumpeter 1945, USS ESSEX 1/540 Revell (vintage) 1962, USS ESSEX 1/350 Trumpeter 1942, USS ESSEX LHD-2 as commissioned, converted from USS Wasp kit Gallery Models. Plus 35 other plastic and wood ship kits.

  • Member since
    September 2012
Posted by GMorrison on Sunday, June 21, 2015 10:29 AM

I see two on the MM site. One for $ 190 on sale for $ 126, and a "digital" one for $ 375. But I gather the $ 190 one is suggested (?).

As for joggling and nibbing, I'll save that for the Heller Victory.

OK, that was a joke.

I see in the Elsie plans that the after part of the deck (quarter deck?) is drawn with the planking parallel to the deckhouse as you said. Therefore their suggesting to cant the scribed sheets and bookmatch them. But I couldn't agree more, laying the planking was really satisfying, and getting the plank end pattern to work gave me an education in why the ends are where they are (deck beams of course), why the deck beams are where they are (ribs and hence the exposed timber heads around the bulwarks. I know this stuff but it's fun to be able to actually recreate it.

One day I'll probably be faced with planking a model deck "yacht style" i.e. parallel (if that's an accurate term) to the waterways. That would be pretty.

 Modeling is an excuse to buy books.

 

  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: Greenville, NC
Posted by jtilley on Sunday, June 21, 2015 10:56 AM

My first table saw was an 8" bench top model - the cheapest one Sears made, and about the only such tool an assistant professor's salary could handle. I quickly discovered that it could produce surprisingly good results if equipped with a good blade. Sears made a "satin finish plywood veneer blade" that could make cuts that didn't need sanding. I set up my cheap little saw with a crude homemade adjustable fence (wood, carriage bolts, and wing nuts for adjustment) and a zero-clearance insert with a splitter plate. With that modification, that saw could make boxwood strips 1/32" square.

The drawbacks of that tool were that it was tricky to adjust (repeating dimensions was almost impossible) and it turned most of the stock into sawdust. And it made a lot of noise (not good in a low-rent apartment). And I always felt like it was lurking in the corner waiting for the chance to slice off my fingers. (I've known a couple of guys who've run their hands through table saws. It's no fun.

That Micromark saw has a good, precisely adjustable fence (now with digital readout, and is reasonably quiet. And the blades are really skinny. And I THINK it would jam before it cut through a bone. I treat it with respect, though.)

I'll take the Mcromark version any time. One other tip, though: if you buy it, pick up a few different blades, a package of zero-clearance inserts, and a miter sled. [Later edit: and the set of featherboards, too.]

GM, I can't recommend that $126 Micromark saw very strongly unless it's the only one you can afford - in which case it may well be the best option in that price range. But, as I mentioned earlier, it just doesn't have the flexibility and precision that the $375 one has. On the cheaper one, you can't even adjust the height of the blade.

The next big challenge on the GLT is going to be all those little scupper slots in the bulwarks. Making a small, rectangular hole that begins at precise locations is tricky - and it has to be done 40+ times. I've got some ingenious ideas, but my ingenious ideas frequently don't work.

Youth, talent, hard work, and enthusiasm are no match for old age and treachery.

  • Member since
    September 2012
Posted by GMorrison on Sunday, June 21, 2015 11:15 AM

So which of these two:

www.micromark.com/microlux-digital-table-saw,11530.html

or

www.micromark.com/microlux-miniature-table-saw,6936.html

I'm guessing the former.

I've owned or had access to some really lousy tablesaws. The kind that bounce around on the floor.

Back in the day when public high schools actually had a vocational program and taught "shop", yes and "home economics" for the girls, which would have been much more relevant for me in hindsight- we couldn't use the table saw. Welders, lathe, bandsaw, sure. I've always heard the most dangerous tool in the shop is the radial arm saw.

 Modeling is an excuse to buy books.

 

JOIN OUR COMMUNITY!

Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.

SEARCH FORUMS
FREE NEWSLETTER
By signing up you may also receive reader surveys and occasional special offers. We do not sell, rent or trade our email lists. View our Privacy Policy.