How can I cut this shape?

[dpmstevens]

I'm making some skirting boards because I can't find anything to match the ones in my house. After a lot of fiddling about I managed to cut a profile that pretty much matches the original ogee, but I'm stuck on the last bit.

I broke the moulding down into two pieces (ignore the join in the pic of the replica moulding - it's a test piece and the result of a mistake...) and used a router in a table to cut the shapes, The top piece, which I've made, is separate to the skirting board, onto which I will cut the last part of the moulding, and then join the two together.

I can't work out how to cut the shape. It's like half a pointed arch, and if there was a cutter that was, say, a radius or cove bit with a pointed tip, that would be perfect. But there doesn't seem to be such a thing. I've got about 15 metres to do, and I'd be keen to stick with the router for speed. I also have a table saw and a trim router, if there's anything there that could work.

Any guidance much appreciated, as it's holding up my bathroom rebuild!

 

[deema]

It will most likely have been cut on a spindle moulder with a dedicated cutter.

 

[Doug71]

Will a cove cutter in a router not do the mould on the bottom section if the top is going to be separate or am I misunderstanding something?

 

[Cabinetman]

Not a perfect solution, lower the blade on your table saw and keep passing the wood over till lt resembles the shape, then take the little corners off with some rough abrasive. Sounds a faff but it won’t take too long.you could do a test piece first, and whilst your at it do a bit extra as you never know when you may need it. Ian
Edit, plane the profile onto the edge of a piece of softwood to wrap the abrasive around

 

[dpmstevens]

Will a cove cutter in a router not do the mould on the bottom section if the top is going to be separate or am I misunderstanding something?

View attachment 114971

That's exactly what I want to do. Trouble is, because it's such a shallow curve the radius would be huge - about 37.5mm or so, which is why I wondered about an arch-shaped cutter. I can't seem to see a cove bit that would match the shape. Or maybe I'm missing something!

 

[dpmstevens]

It will most likely have been cut on a spindle moulder with a dedicated cutter.

It's Victorian (1878) so I guess they'd have done it by hand with moulding planes or on some steam powered machines. I did look at spindle moulders but the costs didn't add up.

 

[Jacob]

Just put a simple bevel there instead. As long as the overall geometry is OK nobody will notice.

 

[TominDales]

Just put a simple bevel there instead. As long as the overall geometry is OK nobody will notice.

I was thinking along the same lines, if you are doing it in two sections as your picture shows with the upper ogee and lower is like a u shaped bevel, then the lower can be made by cutting a bevel and and a bit of a sand as Cabinetman says, you could made a scraper or cutter from a chisel blade into a piece of wood, but careful sanding wont take long
If the new section is not identical to those you are marching, I suggest to disguise this you remove a bit of the original back to a place that isn't seen ie a door frame or corner and then continue with the new from that point. Our house has a lot of Regency mouldings and not everyone is identical I suspect some some rooms had patrician walls added/removed and a later Victorian craftsman used a different plane. It looks characterful.

 

[pe2dave]

It's Victorian (1878) so I guess they'd have done it by hand with moulding planes or on some steam powered machines. I did look at spindle moulders but the costs didn't add up.

Expensive: Find a woodwork shop with a spindle moulder. Take the shape and have a cutter cut to that shape, ask the shop to do it for you?

 

[jcassidy]

I have done this, albeit on a smaller scale (couple of metres, not 15!), using 40 sandpaper to shape the form, and then going up the grades to finish it. didn't take too long at 40 to get the shape. If I had a tablesaw, I'd've done what @Cabinetman said, but as I don't, I did what @Jacob said - formed the shape on a piece of pine (IIRC) and wrapped the paper around that. Bit of a pig but needs must.

 

[xy mosian]

I can't add to the answers already given.
Still just look at the quality of the wood in the original, that piece at least won't bend or twist.
geoff

 

[Cabinetman]

I can't add to the answers already given.
Still just look at the quality of the wood in the original, that piece at least won't bend or twist.
geoff

Hadn’t noticed that Geoff, you’re dead right – it’s quartersawn.

 

[xy mosian]

Sometimes I wonder just how much, general woodwork was done with quartersawn stock.
A number of years ago I was asked to restore a writing slope. When it came to sorting out a damaged corner, I was suprised, in my ignorance, to find veneered softwood. Looking past that I found the stock to be quartersawn and at about 12 growth lines to the inch. Good stuff indeed. Much like this.
My parents brought me up in a 1908 terrace, and although I can remember splinters from through and through sawn floorboards, I cannot remember the quality of stock used in skirtings and architraves etc.. I know that Jacob has worked on many a restoration of 'old' furniture, windows and the like. Has anyone else any experience in this area?.
I have some small bits of Sycamore felled maybe 8 years ago in my garden. These were purposely split to provide a few 'quartersawn' pieces. Those that I planed up are still as flat as the day I planed them, just much harder. Just goes to show that what I was taught back in the sixties woodwork class was actually true. Thank you Mr. Ibbotson.
geoff

 

[Jacob]

Sometimes I wonder just how much, general woodwork was done with quartersawn stock.
A number of years ago I was asked to restore a writing slope. When it came to sorting out a damaged corner, I was suprised, in my ignorance, to find veneered softwood. Looking past that I found the stock to be quartersawn and at about 12 growth lines to the inch. Good stuff indeed. Much like this.
My parents brought me up in a 1908 terrace, and although I can remember splinters from through and through sawn floorboards, I cannot remember the quality of stock used in skirtings and architraves etc.. I know that Jacob has worked on many a restoration of 'old' furniture, windows and the like. Has anyone else any experience in this area?.
I have some small bits of Sycamore felled maybe 8 years ago in my garden. These were purposely split to provide a few 'quartersawn' pieces. Those that I planed up are still as flat as the day I planed them, just much harder. Just goes to show that what I was taught back in the sixties woodwork class was actually true. Thank you Mr. Ibbotson.
geoff

They used everything if possible.
The basic rule for quality is "just good enough" as otherwise good timber is being wasted. Veneered softwood would really need to be 1/4 sawn for stability.
Pine stripping has led to the impression that they used any old rubbish but in fact it would have been "just good enough" under paint, with knots knotted, cracks filled with putty etc, but "just not good enough" for bare timber!
One prob with the "just good enough" principle is that searching through your stockpile may only produce stuff "too good for the job" which can really hold things up. In fact a long established workshop may have stuff "too good" to use which has been there for many years, if not generations.
Might be worth a look in The Wheelwright's Shop | English literature 1900-1945 for comment on this.
PS theres a huge difference between somebody trying to make things with best possible outcome and those making things for a living. The former want the best materials they can lay their hands on, the latter the worst materials (just good enough) they can get away with. It's just common sense - just as a grocer would sell his older stock first.

 

[Cabinetman]

They used everything if possible.
The basic rule for quality is "just good enough" as otherwise good timber is being wasted. Veneered softwood would really need to be 1/4 sawn for stability.
Pine stripping has led to the impression that they used any old rubbish but in fact it would have been "just good enough" under paint, with knots knotted, cracks filled with putty etc, but "just not good enough" for bare timber!
One prob with the "just good enough" principle is that searching through your stockpile may only produce stuff "too good for the job" which can really hold things up. In fact a long established workshop may have stuff "too good" to use which has been there for many years, if not generations.
Might be worth a look in The Wheelwright's Shop | English literature 1900-1945 for comment on this.
PS theres a huge difference between somebody trying to make things with best possible outcome and those making things for a living. The former want the best materials they can lay their hands on, the latter the worst materials (just good enough) they can get away with. It's just common sense - just as a grocer would sell his older stock first.

Actually you’re quite right Jacob, I hadn’t realised I did it, but I scout about my workshop for quite a while sometimes and it can be annoying when the only bit you find is a bit too good to use really, and when you’ve cut off the part you want it doesn’t leave a bit that’s much use for anything else—very frustrating. Ian

 

[Rorton]

We have a local timber yard that has a lot of different cutters for skirting - I used this on our house (ignore the fact its oak and architrave) was just trying to show the profile. Its called regency, and not dissimilar to yours - are you matching up to existing in a room or doing the whole room with the same profile?

I just ask them to run the cutter along some redwood of the right size and job done.

https://www.skeelingtimberonlineshop.co.uk/store/Oak-Regency-Mould-Architrave-1-Door-Set-p138320782

 

[xy mosian]

They used everything if possible.
The basic rule for quality is "just good enough" as otherwise good timber is being wasted. Veneered softwood would really need to be 1/4 sawn for stability.
Pine stripping has led to the impression that they used any old rubbish but in fact it would have been "just good enough" under paint, with knots knotted, cracks filled with putty etc, but "just not good enough" for bare timber!
One prob with the "just good enough" principle is that searching through your stockpile may only produce stuff "too good for the job" which can really hold things up. In fact a long established workshop may have stuff "too good" to use which has been there for many years, if not generations.
Might be worth a look in The Wheelwright's Shop | English literature 1900-1945 for comment on this.
PS theres a huge difference between somebody trying to make things with best possible outcome and those making things for a living. The former want the best materials they can lay their hands on, the latter the worst materials (just good enough) they can get away with. It's just common sense - just as a grocer would sell his older stock first.

Of course Jacob. That must have been much easier if cutting your own tree. Adam has shown very well the choices he makes, I suppose that applies to woodworkers who have the chance to prepare their own stock as well.
Your point about putting to one side 'It's too good for this job' material is well made. As an amateur I have quite a lot of those pieces which I am going to have to find a good use for soon. That or the wife will chuck them out.
Thanks for the reminder about The Wheelwrights Shop, I have The Village Carpenter - The Village Carpenter: Amazon.co.uk: Walter Rose: 9780854420650: Books, which I should read again for Walter Rose's insight.

Cabinetman, I am relieved to find I am in good company.
geoff

 

[dpmstevens]

We have a local timber yard that has a lot of different cutters for skirting - I used this on our house (ignore the fact its oak and architrave) was just trying to show the profile. Its called regency, and not dissimilar to yours - are you matching up to existing in a room or doing the whole room with the same profile?

I just ask them to run the cutter along some redwood of the right size and job done.

https://www.skeelingtimberonlineshop.co.uk/store/Oak-Regency-Mould-Architrave-1-Door-Set-p138320782

That is, indeed, very close. I've actually sorted the problem now - I found an end-of-line Trend vertical panelling cutter, which doesn't seem to be made anymore, with a 40mm radius. That's close enough to work, so we'll see how it looks when it arrives.

As for the quality of the timber, this house (and the others in the lane) are built with good quality wood. I salvaged a sash window from my neighbour and it has an oak sill, which I've never seen in a house of this age before. The window is in perfect condition (or it was until the UPVC people hacked the frame into eight pieces...)

Compared to the quality of redwood today, the stuff used in this house looks like mahogany. I wonder if materials were comparatively more expensive in 1878 than now, while labour was much cheaper.

 

[thetyreman]

just look at the quality of the wood in the original, that piece at least won't bend or twist.
geoff

+1 the original quartersawn piece is much higher quality wood.

 

[Genn]

Whitehill tools have that profile in their skirting profile cutter block knives as little as £28 a pair, then find a nice man with a spindle moulder and euro block.