Binding routering

[printer2]

I am close to admitting I need to make my binding easier and have been looking at the Stewmac and LMI cutter and bearing sets. I just don't know what to choose or if I should just get everything with Stewmac's $200 set (Canadian funds).

http://www.stewmac.com/Luthier_Tools...r_Bit_Set.html

http://www.lmii.com/products/tools-s...utter-bearings

Any thoughts?

[charles Tauber]

I have the Stewmac set. It's fine.

However, you still need some means of dealing with the curvature of top and back plates to ensure binding rabbets are uniform in size.

My preference, these days is to use the jig designed by Larrivee and apprentices back in the 70's.

https://www.canadianluthiersupply.co...ts/binding-jig

It uses a single bit and a series of sized cylinders. To change rabbet width, you use the desired cylinder size. Fast and easy - no auxiliary board, no levelling feet - just choose your cylinder, set router depth, cut rabbets. But, not cheap, unless you make your own. Similarly priced to Stewmac and LMII solutions all in.

[Shuksan]

You don't need to buy all of the bearing sizes right off the bat. I started out with the StewMac Standard Binding Router Bit Set which has 9 bearings, one of which is a flush cut bearing. Seven of the bearings are in the range of 0.040 to 0.150 ledge cut width and then there is a jump to a 0.200 ledge cut. The 0.040 to 0.150 bearings worked for me on a few guitars with different binding/purfling combinations, but I then found that some binding/purfling combinations were falling in the middle of the 0.020 gaps in the 9 bearing range and I ended up buying the 5 missing bearings to make a complete set from 0.040 to 0.150 in 0.010 increments.

If I were to do it over again, I would start out with 0.070 and 0.080 bearings for cutting binding channels and 0.090, 0.100. 0.110, 0.120, 0.130, and 0.140 bearings to cut purfling ledges to cover various binding/purfling combinations up to binding + three layers of 0.020 purfling strips. If you want to use something wider like herringbone purfling, you need to include one of the bearings that cuts a deep ledge. For the LMI herringbone + 0.080 binding, I needed a 0.210 bearing.

The StewMac and LMI bearing sets have slightly different ranges of ledge widths with the LMI set starting at one size larger and ending at one size larger than the StewMac set. The StewMac bearings have a flush cut bearing, but the LMI bearings do not.

I'm very happy with the StewMac cutter and bearings.

[emmsone]

I have the stew mac bearings, i have about 6 or 7 now, i bought 3 or 4 at the start and then the others after working out the sizes of the binding i was utilising. especially if you are using standardised sized self made bindings or pre-made bindings from places like LMI and Stew mac, you only need what you'll use definitely not them all.

I don't own one, but i'd love to get a jig like the one Charles recommended, i definitely think its a system that is much more adjustable, and seems simple and logical to use.
Chris Ensor also makes them http://www.ensorguitars.com/for_sale_jig.html

[charles Tauber]

Originally Posted by emmsone

Chris Ensor also makes them http://www.ensorguitars.com/for_sale_jig.html

Clearly an improvement over the original. About the same price, as well.

I wasn't aware of that jig. Thanks for bringing it up.

[printer2]

Thanks for the advice guys. So far I have not done too much binding work and am unsure what sizes normal used. I would not have a problem getting what I need as I go along, that is if I lived on the other side of our border. It might be cheaper just to bite the bullet upfront and not worry about what sizes I need in the future.

I did my own dumb and dirty version of the jigs shown. It was only meant to be used for a couple of guitars, I originally thought I would build two or three and that would be it. Oh well I could be doing worse things.

[mirwa]

I am not a fan of ones that follow the sides and make cuts accordingly, much prefer to take that little bit of extra time and mount my body into a carriage and clock it up for a relative 90 degree cut

I have the compete lmi bearing set, stewmac’s set looks good as well.

Steve

[Sam VanLaningham]

I've made all my other jigs and my thickness sander. But I splurged for the Canadian one. I doubt my joinery skills are better than yours Fred, or steve, an or Emmsome, et al, but this is one area I feel decently confident just because it is indeed a no brained to use and even hard to mess up if I wobble a bit whilst turning the guitar around.

Sam

[phavriluk]

Here's a personal opinion, for what it's worth:

I suggest that OP take a look at 'Kenneth Michael Guitars' web site and his binding channel cutting process and equipment. Vastly less elaborate (and far less costly) than the pantographic stuff, and router bits do not use or require bearings to hold cut depth distance. I got good results the first time I used the tool. There's a video of the tool in use, where I'm not sure.

A good characteristic of KMG's designs is that any errors in use result in cuts that are too shallow. Customer proof. Nice when professional process engineers design luthiers' tooling.

[printer2]

Originally Posted by phavriluk

Here's a personal opinion, for what it's worth:

I suggest that OP take a look at 'Kenneth Michael Guitars' web site and his binding channel cutting process and equipment. Vastly less elaborate (and far less costly) than the pantographic stuff, and router bits do not use or require bearings to hold cut depth distance. I got good results the first time I used the tool. There's a video of the tool in use, where I'm not sure.

A good characteristic of KMG's designs is that any errors in use result in cuts that are too shallow. Customer proof. Nice when professional process engineers design luthiers' tooling.

That is kind of interesting. You could compare it to the other non-bearing methods, extending the ledge up would give you the third point of contact as the others. What looks inviting is that the guitar body is riding on the table and not held up in the air. Mind you, you would need to get body height at the right heigh as the cutter to get a parallel cut. More food for thought.

[clinchriver]

I use Chris Ensor's routing jig it works

[redir]

I ripped off the idea from the Larivee, Ensor, Canadian supply jig and came up with this. For a few bucks and a few hours of work it actually works quite well. There is a track in the back plate with an adjustable knob in the back so that the rest can move up and down and get locked off.

[phavriluk]

No picture visible. Sorry.

[printer2]

Here is my jig that I have been using. It is not the best to set up. Using it you have to keep a good eye on holding the cut area at the top of rollers as any off angle seems to result in the wrong depth of cut. I figure part of the problem is the small roller. I have been using a 1/4" down cut bit, would a larger diameter bit work better.



On another note, I could not find the picture on my computer and buckled down and went to get a copy off of Photobucket. Even when I was logged in they would not let me get a copy of my picture. I ended up making a copy in another folder and then was able to download a copy. I just despise that site.


Anyway I want to make a easier to use and more repeatable jig than I made. It gets the job done but it is just a lot of work to do it and easy to screw up. The picture shows a piece of wood for the top to ride on, I did cut a doughnut from some high density plastic for it.

[CabinetMan]

Here is what I used when I cut my channels. It worked quite well and I don't have to worry about having to buy bits with guide bearings, Just straight cut bits. I got this laminate trimmer from my grandfather. The base and guide roller can be adjusted up and down and the guide roller can also be adjusted in and out a great deal. I'm going to make a good 5 degree base to use on the arched backs. Although the shims worked ok I'm not going to use them again.

Don't know if this type of guide bearing system is still available or not.

20171004_144340 by Cabinet Man, on Flickr