Axminster Helical Head Thicknesser (AP310T2)

[Thedog]

Hello,

I am interested in the Axminster AP310T2 Thicknesser, which is a spiral head (Helical) 56 cutter (4 rows x 14 cutters) design with a 95mm dia. head.
The description states the head is a 4 x 14 (56 cutter) helical head, but the manual states its a 6 row x 14 head (84 Cutters)

After discussing this with Axminster, who were very knowledgeable and very helpful, it turns out that the older 'Trade' branded version had the 6 row head and the newer "Professional' branded version has the 4 row head. The two machines look the same. I believe that the older trade one was the MB103 or AP3102. They reduced the number of rows down to 4 and also reduced the feed speed. Both tools have a helical head (Cutters at an angle, producing a shearing cut) and not a spiral head, where the cutters I believe still follow a spiral pattern but are square to the work.

My question is although a 4 row head reduces the cost and of course the number of cutters to replace, can I expect the AP310T2 to be signifyingly better over a portable HSS straight blade thicknesser. I have the Makita BN2012 which produces amazing results, but I am hoping that the AP310T2 will be even better in many respects.

Really, I just want to open a discussion about the difference between a 4 and 6 row machine. I know that Record's offering has a 4 row head but its dia. is 78mm compared the the 95mm head on the Axminster. And of course the head speed and federate makes a difference.

Any thoughts on this? or I am I just over thinking things as usual! (Axminster currently have these on offer with a £500 discount).

Thanks
John

 

[Myfordman]

Work out the width of each scollop cut. Finer the better

 

[Spectric]

I am interested in the Axminster AP310T2 Thicknesser, which is a spiral head (Helical)

It cannot be both a spiral head and a helical head as they are different, one being spiral and the other a helix.

 

[Thedog]

HI Roy,

Yes, that's also one of the reasons I contacted Axminster as they describe it as an Helical head and a spiral head. They confirmed it has an Helical head, where the cutters are at an angle. Each cutter also has a 102 Deg. radius on each cutting edge. As it has a Helical head I would hope that it is better than my Makita 2012NB. I have to say that the Makita is fantastic and one of the best tools I have ever bought. The results are amazing and the overall build of the machine is excellent and spot on and really solid. I am consider buying a Helix head for it, which I think are around $400 (Just looking at options really).

With regard to scooping out the wood, a conventional HSS blade thicknesser must do the same but just one long scoop.
The Axminster head runs at 4050 RPM and is 95mm with a feed-rate of 6 M/min. The record has a slightly smaller head dia. but a feed-rate of 7 M/min.

Anyway, I sure the Axminster offering will give good results.

Where would you buy replacement high quality cutters?. I need to replace my Makita blades. Is their recommended supplier that members on here use?

Thanks
John

 

[Spectric]

So far I am not swayed by these new cutter blocks that use multiple cutters, with something like a Tersa cutter block it is so easy to swap out the knives and without any setting. Changing the individual cutters is going to be time consuming even if you are looking to just rotate them and there has been cases of the screws being a right pita to undo. My experience of the cutter blocks where you have to set the heights was just a nightmare, if you search the forum there are some good threads with regards to this and I solved my problem using any aftermarket system that uses carriers. I think the terms spiral and helical are what causes some confusion and with the spiral cutter block it is not a continous spiral, the cutters are still cutting in the same plane as a block with knives except they each take it in turn rather than one long continous cut and is probably why they seem to work more quietly. Whether any one of them is really much better than the others is open to debate and depends upon what wood you are using.

This is a true helical block where the shearing action is continous.

 

[Mikebart]

One would assume more cutters would mean smaller chips better finish and or faster feed speed.

 

[Thedog]

This is a true helical block where the shearing action is continuous.

View attachment 172822

Hi Roy,
I didn't know you could get such a thing. I have never seen a continuous head like this. Must give superior results.
Very interesting.

 

[Spectric]

It would need a more powerful motor to spin it as it is a continous cut.

 

[Woodman22nd]

One would assume more cutters would mean smaller chips better finish and or faster feed speed.

Increasing the number of cutters results in smaller chips, though it may not significantly enhance the surface finish. However, it does allow for higher feeding speeds, greater cutting thickness, and the quantity of boards processed within the same work hours.

 

[Woodman22nd]

So far I am not swayed by these new cutter blocks that use multiple cutters, with something like a Tersa cutter block it is so easy to swap out the knives and without any setting. Changing the individual cutters is going to be time consuming even if you are looking to just rotate them and there has been cases of the screws being a right pita to undo. My experience of the cutter blocks where you have to set the heights was just a nightmare, if you search the forum there are some good threads with regards to this and I solved my problem using any aftermarket system that uses carriers. I think the terms spiral and helical are what causes some confusion and with the spiral cutter block it is not a continous spiral, the cutters are still cutting in the same plane as a block with knives except they each take it in turn rather than one long continous cut and is probably why they seem to work more quietly. Whether any one of them is really much better than the others is open to debate and depends upon what wood you are using.

This is a true helical block where the shearing action is continous.

View attachment 172822

Indeed, it is a genuine shear cut. The helical blades must be tailored to fit different cutterhead diameters, and one should take into account both the initial cost of the blades and ongoing sharpening expenses.