Tails or Pins first - Does it matter?

[D_W]

can't disagree with any of that, and I cut them with a little something left as you do, though I haven't ever thought too hard about it. I just want them to fit and retain their bits, but not look like a machine made them.

This is the closest I have to pictures of dovetails on my phone.

https://s2.postimg.org/j4lqcvfwp/20161225_170538.jpg

I'll have to track down the drawers tonight. I build so few drawers (though they're quite enjoyable) that I never thought about it, but I like your approach. No gang cuts, etc, either. The sides are all hand thicknessed, but I don't think it would make a difference, even at that, as long as the pin boards are relatively similar thickness on each end. On kitchen cabinets, especially, very little matters as far as precision goes.

I took a picture of my parents' dovetails on various pieces of furniture a couple of years ago, but now I can't find it. It's not a scientific test, but there was no shortage of various minor overcuts, bits and pieces missing, but only one glaring booger - one of the tails separated into a half blind front and broke perpendicular to the length of the drawer, despite the wood not looking like it was oriented poorly. No clue on that one -broke in a jagged mess right at the marking line with the entire tail residing in the front.

 

[Trafalgar]

If I'm doing drawers and I end up not having to put a little joiner beside a couple of pins (or tails depending on your viewpoint) I'm working too slowly and too tentatively, or got damn lucky. I'm not trying to make up time at this stage of the game, but I'm not overly enamored of the process either. My son could cut a perfect joint at age 10, all the way to glue-up. He has marvelous dexterity and manual skills but at the moment couldn't care less about furniture or anything that would use his obvious gift. Me, I need a new pair of glasses and cataract surgery on my left eye. Gettin' old is a *****.

Great use of the rigid insulation panel. Totally stealing that...

 

[D_W]

Don't disagree with any of that, either. I'd rather cut them in rhythm than stop and fiddle. I don't do it often like you, or I'd really be further along with that.

If I had someone paying me who wanted perfect drawers and was willing to pay for them, I'd think differently. My parents' furniture has survived 125-200 years pretty well with what some folks would call sloppy dovetails (which is what they were referred to as when I posted them on wood central - but they had such nice proportions and no pretentiousness that I thought they were quite nice).

 

[Sam_Jack]

While we are on the subject (and to explain a bit) – I have just about finished repairing an ‘armoire’ which is at least 150 y.o. I daren’t say restored; but, tis serviceable and I managed to pick up some ‘Baltic’ (I think) pine of a similar vintage to make the floor and top with. I even managed to copy the missing mouldings and match the colour closely enough to pass muster from a man on a galloping horse. I digress.

The ‘side panels’ at the top, for the non existent lid had the dovetails (sans pins) in poor condition. When I got around to a detailed examination of said joints, I noticed that the inside face of the ‘tails’ had been undercut; by about half. The panels were 7/8” (ish) thick (it was a mess) at the top of the ‘tail’ and about half that at the bottom, but deliberate.

The family who own it can prove it was bought in Morocco 150 years ago; I suspect a French hand in its making, the hand carved doors, the iron mongery and massive lock all have that feel to ‘em. But, not being familiar with production methods or even the ‘era’ I wondered if someone could help explain the ‘mystery’ of the undercut dovetails.

Sorry about the ramble, but this thing intrigues me. – ‘Twas a struggle and it ain’t pretty, but square, vertical and serviceable now. Dab of stain, little polish and off it goes.

 

[AndyT]

While we are on the subject (and to explain a bit) – I have just about finished repairing an ‘armoire’ which is at least 150 y.o. I daren’t say restored; but, tis serviceable and I managed to pick up some ‘Baltic’ (I think) pine of a similar vintage to make the floor and top with. I even managed to copy the missing mouldings and match the colour closely enough to pass muster from a man on a galloping horse. I digress.

The ‘side panels’ at the top, for the non existent lid had the dovetails (sans pins) in poor condition. When I got around to a detailed examination of said joints, I noticed that the inside face of the ‘tails’ had been undercut; by about half. The panels were 7/8” (ish) thick (it was a mess) at the top of the ‘tail’ and about half that at the bottom, but deliberate.

The family who own it can prove it was bought in Morocco 150 years ago; I suspect a French hand in its making, the hand carved doors, the iron mongery and massive lock all have that feel to ‘em. But, not being familiar with production methods or even the ‘era’ I wondered if someone could help explain the ‘mystery’ of the undercut dovetails.

Sorry about the ramble, but this thing intrigues me. – ‘Twas a struggle and it ain’t pretty, but square, vertical and serviceable now. Dab of stain, little polish and off it goes.

If you could post a picture of two it would be much clearer - I'm struggling to visualise your piece of furniture and not sure whether when you say "undercut" you mean cut beyond the baseline - which I would call "overcut"!

I've certainly seen plenty of old lapped drawer dovetails where the sawcuts for the sockets go beyond the baseline - I think this was deliberate, to make the saw cut deeper into the inside corner and make it a few seconds quicker to chisel out the waste.

 

[Jacob]

Overcutting is normal practice and everybody should do it. On top class work it's just a gnats, barely visible. on cheaper work it may be quite deep and obvious. Basically it clears the corners from pin holes, on blind DTs it cuts more of the side of the pins (not all the way obviously) and makes waste easier to remove in both cases.

 

[Sam_Jack]

Sorry Andy – cant do a photo now; should have -. OK, I’ll try to describe it. You have a panel, two foot wide – vertical; part of the side of a wardrobe. On top, where to ‘lid’ fits there are 6 (six) 40 mm (on top, cut to 1:7) dovetails, into which the ‘lid’ ends fit (pins, if you will). The internal side of the tails have been cut away; toward the outside of the panel, so the ‘tails’ 7/8 at the top, reduced to about half that ‘thickness’ at the depth line for the lid panels. Almost a ‘wedge’ if you cut it off. Side view below. Best I can manage. Nope no graphic Stand a matchbox on end then cut half away -

 

[AndyT]

I think I get it Sam.

Have you noticed how NONE of the YouTube demos of how easy dovetails are ever feature a wardrobe side, six foot long?
What works on two diddy little carefully prepared sample pieces doesn't always translate easily into practical work on full sized furniture. Frustratingly, I've cut lapped dovetails several times on quite large bookcase sides, but don't have any clear recollection (or any photos) of how I did it. I would not be surprised if I resorted to cutting a bit deep, in a place that would be visible only to the angels!

 

[Sam_Jack]

AndyT – “Have you noticed how NONE of the YouTube demos of how easy dovetails are ever feature a wardrobe side, six foot long?”

Don’t really watch a lot of YT ‘how to’ video’s, although I expect they are useful in some cases, YT is great for basics and ‘ideas’. But not with the sort of ‘troubles’ the old witch in the wardrobe gave me; don’t know how you could even start to show a ‘cure’ for that sort of thing, I confess the ‘old girl’ nearly beat me though, certainly got me thinking, nearly ended up fire wood once or twice. Half the problems was that someone had tried to fix it up, with screws and batons and glue and etc. I got it in bits and pieces. Water damage along the bottom, insect damage on top; every single panel ‘cupped’, bent and/or twisted. To add to the problems there was (is) an eight inch panel which fits at an angle between the front face and the side panels, fixed with ‘hard wood’ hand cut ‘dowels’ which had been hammered in. Big gaps between the panels.

I actually took it all apart and built a cradle out of 3x1.5 (70x35) to hold it; which helped a great deal with the ‘angled’ panels. I don’t think I could have got it done without that cradle; even with it was a beast and it fought back. The moral of the story is patience and time. When I hit a snag I’d put the tools down and sit looking at the thing, trying to ‘see’ where my ‘cure’ was going to produce a problem further along. For me that’s the key; when you have a dozen big boards to line up, join, get square and flush without too many gaps and holes for the angels to see, you can’t just plough on. But as I say, it was a tough nut. Reckon I could have built it from scratch in a couple of days, but it took a good week plus a bit to cobble it all back together. Don’t think it would have made a very entertaining You Tube video, except for the colourful language, blood and tears. But man, the carved doors were worth the effort.

It’s tucked away in a mates storage at the moment, so I can’t get to it for a happy snap, I will take a picture of the doors which I’ll try to post in due course.

http://auntypru.com/wp-content/uploads/ ... G_0330.jpg

http://auntypru.com/wp-content/uploads/ ... G_0332.jpg

 

[AndyT]

I noticed there's a little black and white aid to contemplation in the first picture. Good approach!

 

[woodbrains]

Hello,

Perculiarly, those dovetails are orientated the wrong way! Tails should be on the top and pins on the sides, the idea being, the sides do not part company from the top, outwards..

This is one instance where (when done correctly orientated) tail cutting first is probably better, as the marking out would be cumbersome in such a tall piece. However this is also one instance where I would likely not use dovetails for that very reason. In this instance, the use of dovetails is fairly ineffectual anyway, as they are incorrectly used.

Mike.

 

[Jacob]

Hello,

Perculiarly, those dovetails are orientated the wrong way! Tails should be on the top and pins on the sides, the idea being, the sides do not part company from the top, outwards.. ...
.....

Yep.

 

[Sam_Jack]

Hi Mike/ Jacob – what can I say; I agree; and, had I had the making of it – things would have been ‘dun different’ – however. The pictures I took were at the before the beginning of the repairs – I made the ‘blank’ floor and lid from old floorboards – which fitted into the dado/ housings from the original maker. I needed to get a ‘hard’ point to start from as the sides were ‘bowed’ outward, which threw everything out to blazes. Once I got the ‘cradle’ built it started to fall into place – almost, but the varying lengths across the top (could not take out all the ‘bowing’, nearly drove me nuts, trying to get the ‘pins’ to marry with the tails (all a bit ‘fluffy’ about the ends).

Monster: as said, not a restoration but a repair and return to service. Must say though, despite it all, there are a few of those dovetails now happily married with individually crafted pins, which make me smile. Not my old cabinet maker friend though – he’d turn up, say little and shake his head - a lot. Anyway – it’s done now; the blocks are gone, the long bevelled joints almost all closed (nothing is perfect) and the thing stands on the base – which is another horror story. Would I do it again? Yes, I think I would; only next time, I’ll know how to do it right, first time. Sorry about the pix – as Andy says; ‘twas thinking time. I only took ‘em so as to know where I may start and see what was needed. Probably a shrink.

Mr T; good Sir, there is absolutely nothing wrong in seeking inspiration of the black and white variety; indeed, ‘tis recommended therapy for those confounded, by arse about joinery.

Cheers.

Thanks for the 'edit' Mods

 

[Paddy Roxburgh]

Hello,

Perculiarly, those dovetails are orientated the wrong way! Tails should be on the top and pins on the sides, the idea being, the sides do not part company from the top, outwards..

This is one instance where (when done correctly orientated) tail cutting first is probably better, as the marking out would be cumbersome in such a tall piece. However this is also one instance where I would likely not use dovetails for that very reason. In this instance, the use of dovetails is fairly ineffectual anyway, as they are incorrectly used.

Mike.

Mike (and others) I am curious about this and would value your input. When I make shelving for boats I dovetail the main carcass with the tails at the sides and the pins on the bottom and top, figuring that the downward force is greater than the sideways force, also I tend to leave the joinery exposed and the tails side is what can be seen from the sides and looks better. Do you consider this to be the correct way around? Now sometimes these shelves are hung on the wall and sometimes they are sat on the floor. If they are sat on the floor obviously the downward force is less relevant (as with this wardrobe), in these cases should I have the tails on the top?
Thanks, Paddy

 

[woodbrains]

Hello Paddy,

It depends on the application, there is no 'only one way does all' solution.

For a wall hung cabinet, for example, I would likely put the tails in the sides, as the weight of the cabinet will tend to cause the joint to open and dovetails will resist that orientated this way. A floor standing case piece has no such force on it that isn't supported through the floor, but tall sides will put force on the case top and bottom, so tails on the tops and pins on the sides counteracts those forces. Especially when doors are hung on the sides or drawers are pulled in and out of the case.

Mike.

 

[Eric The Viking]

I've recently got a copy of Chris Schwarz's "Handplane Essentials." It's a good read and the photography is generally pretty good too.

He has a nifty trick (possibly) relating to tails-first dovetails, which is to plane a very shallow rebate across the "tails" piece the exact width the tails are deep, on the side that will be the inside of the carcase.

Then, when marking for the pins, it registers the stock nicely, and (he says) avoids the need for any complicated holding arrangements (yes I know Cosman et al just go for it, etc.). It gives another advantage too: any final planing or sanding of the inside doesn't make the joint go gappy, and you get a clean corner line too.

He says it only needs a rebate plane, set to the width of the 'pins' stock thickness (plus a tiny amount).

It seems elegantly simple, but I'm a real dovetail novice - probably only cut a dozen or so, ever.

I just wonder if anyone does this, as it sounds clever.

E.

 

[Paddy Roxburgh]

Eric, I've never done it, but I have seen Paul Sellers doing the same thing. I must give it a go one time

 

[Glynne]

I've always cut tails first but in light of this thread I thought I would have a play and try pins with some awkward brown oak. Pins marked, cut and waste cleaned out and I have to admit that I found it a lot easier to get the pins spot on without the worry that I had to fit to the tails.
I cut a small rebate a la Paul Sellers (only I cheated and used a router table) for the tail board and using this as a register to stand the pin board on it was easy to mark the tails with a pencil. For me it was a lot easier to then cut the tails to fit.
I have to admit I was really surprised at the difference and although I was only having a quick play, the results weren't half bad (for me that is).
So thanks to the OP and for all the construction comments re- pins first.

PS I have cut a rebate using chisel and router plane but a router table beats it hands down in terms accuracy and speed. Sorry for that on the hand tool forum.

 

[woodbrains]

I've always cut tails first but in light of this thread I thought I would have a play and try pins with some awkward brown oak. Pins marked, cut and waste cleaned out and I have to admit that I found it a lot easier to get the pins spot on without the worry that I had to fit to the tails.
I cut a small rebate a la Paul Sellers (only I cheated and used a router table) for the tail board and using this as a register to stand the pin board on it was easy to mark the tails with a pencil. For me it was a lot easier to then cut the tails to fit.
I have to admit I was really surprised at the difference and although I was only having a quick play, the results weren't half bad (for me that is).
So thanks to the OP and for all the construction comments re- pins first.

PS I have cut a rebate using chisel and router plane but a router table beats it hands down in terms accuracy and speed. Sorry for that on the hand tool forum.

Hello,

This was exactly my findings when I converted to pins first, about 15 years ago. I used the rebate trick not long after, for one job, but haven't since, for some inexplicable reason. I don't know where I got the idea for that, I was experimenting with different ways to do things, to see how I could tweak my methods. Perhaps I just thought of it as a reasonable thing to try, I didn't know who Chris Schwartz or Paul Sellers were until I started posting here. I should have got in first!

How you sharpen your pencil can have a marked effect on fit, though. I don't use a regular conically sharpened pencil. I sharpen with a knife or a chisel, and facet two opposite sides to form an elliptical point. Imagine a smaller version of a rectangular carpenters pencil. An elliptical point will mark finer lines that are easier to get right into the edges of the tail sockets, and doesn't dub over as quickly as a conical point.

Mike.

 

[Glynne]

In terms of the rebate trick, I saw Rob Cosman use it many years ago when Westonbirt hosted a Festival of Wood and Classic Hand Tools had a large marquee and brought in demonstrators. Cosman used a skew plane to cut the rebate but still did tails first.