Are there optimum techniques

[Bill Blasic]

Mike would you please take your personal vendetta against the AAW somewhere else.

 

[john lucas]

Just because thd AAW doesn't want to publish a certain article at a certain time is not saying they are against it. The editor has to make many choices with lots of submissions for each issue. They are also trying to please a very wide selection of people. Not an easy task.
I asked them about an article showing that sharpening grit size made no difference in cut quality. I proved it turning many different projects. I thought it might be too controversial and talked to the editors about it. On their suggestion I rewrote the article to include all the factors that affect how to get cleaner cuts and it was published in Woodturning Fundamentals.
As you can see in these responses promoting one set of "optimum techniques" proves to be controversial. My suggestion would be to rewrite the article and re submit it.

 

[Kent Reisdorph]

Not to change the direction of the thread, but this notion above is why, 20 years ago, I stopped my AAW membership. To use a baseball metaphor, I'm a "utility woodturner". Put me in, Coach, I can cover 2nd base for the rest of the game. It was around that time that the AAW journal, in my view, solidified its focus on round shapes that could contain a volume, and increasingly those shapes were becoming a starting point for further off-the-lathe embellishment. Wonderful work, but not my interest.

I turn for art-sake, but I just as much, more, really, turn for turning-sake. When I need or want something round from wood, I find the approprite piece of wood, and shape it to meet the need. And this requires, well, mastery (I'm no master) of all the tools in the drawer. Many years ago a coworker presented to me an antique open display cabinet that was adorned with 20 or so 1-1/2" tall turned pegs- beads, coves, tapers, and tenons. Many were missing. "Can you make replacements?" Yep, and it was one of the most challenging projects I'd ever done, partly because of the deliberate need to NOT make all the replacement pegs the same. The 100 year old original was all hand made turnings, and my replacements had to blend in with all their fine nuances of difference, even though from 3 feet away all the pegs looked the same- none were. The AAW had nothing to offer a turner, new or experienced, to perform work like that. That is where I, the "utility woodturner", had to use all my skills, and all my tools, to successfully complete a task.

No display cabinet to fix up? Make a chess set, all turned surfaces, no saw blades. The pawns alone will open your eyes, test your patience, and exercise your skew and spindle gouge skills. Search back to a turned chess set featured in Fine Woodworking in the 1990s, that's the one I replicated in my early days.

[Edit, this was my chess set pattern source-, Oct 1990 American Woodworker-

https://www.ebay.com/itm/304174014086]

If one really wants to master the potential of their tool collection, especially the skew chisel, find a local lace-maker and ask if you can make lace bobbins for them!! Be ready.

Back to the discussion at hand...

I don't read the journal (I just never seem to sit down long enough). I am an AAW member because I think it's an important organization for woodturners.

 

[Kent Reisdorph]

Let's answer a question here. What attracted you to woodturning? Please everyone answer.

In 2022 I moved from Las Vegas to Tennessee. I bought a place with 5 acres, most of it covered in hardwoods. I hadn't done woodworking for 30 years or more, but I knew with all that timber I needed to get back into it. I bought the usual stationary power tools (table saw, bandsaw, planer, etc.) and a Wen lathe because I've always wanted a lathe. What I didn't anticipate how turning would grab me. As it turns out, I have little or no interest in flatwork.

 

[Mark Hepburn]

In 2022 I moved from Las Vegas to Tennessee. I bought a place with 5 acres, most of it covered in hardwoods. I hadn't done woodworking for 30 years or more, but I knew with all that timber I needed to get back into it. I bought the usual stationary power tools (table saw, bandsaw, planer, etc.) and a Wen lathe because I've always wanted a lathe. What I didn't anticipate how turning would grab me. As it turns out, I have little or no interest in flatwork.

Same here Kent. I've been working with wood all my life but about 10 years ago started turning and just don't have the interest in flatwork either.

 

[Mark Hepburn]

Mike would you please take your personal vendetta against the AAW somewhere else.

Bill, thanks for your incisive post.

 

[Mark Hepburn]

I started turning after chancing on Peter Child’s book in a library. The combination of being able to make things, an interest in tools and equipment, in design, and understanding the process was and remains attractive to me.

I started this debate for the purpose of changing the AAW so that it better serves the needs of the bulk of its members. The posts of Steve Tiedman and Reed Gray illustrate the failings of the AAW. There’s going to be a new Board and a new editor for American Woodturner. In my last post I suggested how you could make a difference. Not much sign though that anyone is interested.

Mike, I thought you stated in an earlier thread that you haven't been a member of the AAW for some time. What then is your interest in changing an organization that you don't even belong to? Seems Quixotic at best to me.

 

[Mike Darlow]

You’re wrong Mark Hepburn. I am a founder member of the AAW and am still a member.

I started this debate because the AAW Board and its editor ensured that Terry Martin’s letter was the last word on this debate’s topic of the two beliefs on technique. In one of his early posts Bill Blasic opined that I was alone in my belief that there is a suite of optimum techniques. Read through all the posts and you’ll realize that I’m not alone in my belief. Even if I were alone, that doesn’t make me wrong, and doesn’t make the issue unimportant. In my view it is hugely important, and is one of the reasons why a significant proportion of those who have contributed to this debate are no longer AAW members and are dissatisfied with American Woodturner.

John Lucas states “sharpening grit size made no difference in cut quality”. John Lucas therefore wouldn’t bother to hone, a process which typically uses a 600 “sharpening grit size”. This contradicts Alan Lacer’s evidence in Sharpening Turning Tools. Again mixed messages from the AAW which confuses rather than helps.

 

[john lucas]

Granted I did not hone and edge. I sharpened using a 36 grit wheel and a 350 grit wheel and there was no difference in the cut quality. I simply didnt have enough time to do honing or grinding angles.

 

[Bill Blasic]

OK Mike I went back and have read every comment in this thread. I made a list of those who started to some point agree but if you read their entire post it was with buts. 5 with buts and only 1 that I could say mostly agreed. Nobody said I agree period. In your mind you are right and that is fine but you will never enforce your mind on others. People (woodturners) know what is best for themselves. I myself no longer look for a new tool or process. For me there were just four things that have influenced my turning since the start of my turning journey Thompson Lathe Tools, CBN wheels, the Vector Grind Fixture and Hunter Carbide. You see I have had 14 different lathes (11 in the shop for 10 years) and I still keep 6. I have chucks from all major makers and they all work as advertised. My Monster Hollowing Systems work great for me. My Baxter threading jigs from Best Wood Tools have no equal. Everything I need I have and it all works best for me. There is no optimal way or thing for every woodturner. So quit saying a lot of people agree with me because they don't!

 

[Steve Tiedman]

Sounds like it's about time to wrap up this thread before it starts going in circles and causing more anger.

 

[Michael Anderson]

Sounds like it's about time to wrap up this thread before it starts going in circles and causing more anger.

I agree. I believe there was/is a lot of value in this discussion, but at a certain point the potential for going off the rails outweighs the benefits. I'm going to lock the thread to further replies, something I very rarely do. I also recognize the wealth of knowledge presented here, and encourage anyone coming to this thread after it is locked read through all of the posts. Further discussion can be done so privately.