Unreasonable expectations??

[dedee]

Mark

Looks like an excellant solution and follows the mantra of "if you can't make it accurate then make it adjustable"

Andy

 

[Alf]

Alf, I didn't mean get another machine.

No, I know, but in practical terms that's the only option given the very information from Axminster/Jet that you yourself quoted:

Axminster/Jet,

He could not guaranty in any way to EVER find one that was bang on flat, if he could he'd have one for his own machine. The machines were made to a price and some sacrifice in quality more or less has to be expected.

It'd be nice to think some benefits would come out of this though, like actually getting a wodworker to look at a machine design before you market it. :roll: :lol: It's them engineers again... :wink:

Cheers, Alf

 

[engineer one]

as usual alf we get blamed for everything

but seriously i think both jet and axminster have actually
finally handled this quite well. however to blame the engineers
all the time is a bit incorrect.

but looking at the photos i see that the major problem is the
way in which the fence is mounted, those brackets look
pretty flimsy really, whilst the fact that the bottom of the fence
is pointed adds to the problem.

whilst i agree they should have had a woodworker try out the
machine at the get go, it seems that the engineer did not do his
actual design work properly. the extrusion does not really
meet the kind of spec that i would have considered for this.

anyway mark an interesting final approach, but you wonder how
a t section had been designed to be able to flex like that.

paul :wink:

 

[Mike.C]

Well done Mark, although I stand by what I have said eg Axminster/Jet should supply a non faulty fence, I think in your case things are now slightly different, because you have done such a good job with your fix, they could take it or something like it on board, which down the line may stop others having your problem.

Jake,


I think the danger is that Jet are getting rather hung out to dry on this thread for having the honesty to admit that they build things to tolerances and admitting what those tolerances are, when every other manufacturer has to definition do exactly the same thing. You don't find many of them being this open, and I suspect that most just deal with such complaints quietly for the small percentage of people who complain.

It is all very well saying that Jet don't advertise their tolerances, but nor does anyone else that I've noticed - but they must all have them. At least, on the evidence of this thread, if you asked them what they are they could and would tell you.

Oh come on Jake. Hung out to dry? Yes they may have admitted to building to a tolerance, which is all nice and dandy, but my beef is, they should not make their sacrifices on such an important part of the machine.

As well as giving my views on Marks problem, I also gave my views on the machines that I own:

I wrote,

By the way I love and own a lot of Jet and Axminster kit including a Jet 54A planer, a moriticer, a bobbin sander, and one of their Big Brother Air Shop Filters, and except for a few delivery scratches on the planer, which I put right with the small tin of paint that Axminster included in the kit, I have had no problems what so ever with there machines. So 98% of the time Axminster and Jet get it right, but that is not to say that if they drop the ball we should not complain about it.

So how is saying that I love Axminster/Jet machines, and I have had no problems with mine, and that even though they get it right 98% of the time, that does not mean that if they drop the ball we should not complain about it, hanging them out to dry. I am sure that there are alot of companies out there who would love to get it right 98% of the time.

I think that is a fair assessment of how I see their company, and what they should have supplied in the first place.

PS, It seems that Mark is not alone with his problem https://www.ukworkshop.co.uk/forums/view ... 762#116762
Gidon was having problems with his new Bosch SCMS. But it appears that Axminster sorted this one out.


Cheers

Mike

 

[Jake]

Oh come on Jake. Hung out to dry? Yes they may have admitted to building to a tolerance, which is all nice and dandy, but my beef is, they should not make their sacrifices on such an important part of the machine.

I'll bet all of their competitors also do, but don't admit to it publicly, that's all I'm saying. They've provided the rope by which they are being hung. If I was a manufacturer, my response to this thread would be to clam up in future.

 

[Alf]

If I was a manufacturer, my response to this thread would be to clam up in future.

I hope not. Personally I think the honesty Jet has shown is a breath of fresh air and will make them my first port of call when I next have to consider any machinery. I'm sick to death of manufacturers and suppliers who pretend what we all know goes on in fact doesn't; I'm not an ***** and I don't appreciate being treated like one. I'd sooner have the facts honestly presented every time.

Cheers, Alf

No affiliation, but I'll take cheques, postal orders... :wink:

 

[engineer one]

i'm with alf, it is refreshing in this "cover my a*e world" where people
are more afraid of being sued, than saying we "screwed up" or even
this is why we do what we do. 8)

i have not previously looked at jet as a supplier, because i am not
yet in that area, however, someone recently suggested their
ceiling mounted dust extraction thingie, and now i will look more
seriously at it, and their other products. :twisted:

have to say that the nub of this thread is we have all learnt somethings
we did not expect to, whilst finding that Brimarc are not the only
company to respond positively to properly explained
customer complaints. 8)

paul :wink:

 

[Anonymous]

and whether they are faulty as such could be debated I'll admit.

Mark, I have followed this with interest, but as an engineer, I found the above statement a little odd. There is no debate nor question about a fault in the fence - it is flat within the tolerances set at the design stage and so is not faulty.

However, whether the tolerances are realistic or not may need debating....

Well done on the final fix, nicely done :wink:

 

[Chris Knight]

mark,
Much kudos for the fix you invented - where did you source the brackets by the way?

I am pretty darn sure I wouldn't have bothered for .2mm concavity but that is just me being lazy I guess. Also I always plane stuff by hand that comes off the P/T, to get rid of the planer marks and I'm quite capable of introducing a .2 or.3mm error when doing this!

 

[Scott]

one of the big advantages was the fence. For about the same money as the Jet P/T, which was not available back then, I purchased the Jet 60A jointer which has a cast iron fence. .... Quite a few members have the 60A.

Cast iron doesn't mean flat - it too will have been designed and manufactured to a tolerance.

Could any 60A (or 54A) owner advise just how flat the CI fence on those machines is, preferably with figures? (slightly off the topic of Mark's ally fence but just out of interest since I quite fancy one ...)

Cheers

 

[andycktm]

mark ,
After seeing the photo's i see where your coming from as to why you kept the machine.That look's a nice tidy fix( look's nearly factory) :wink: .
But the fence in my opinion is poor, and off the photo's you can see where the problem lies ,single skin at the slot point allows movement.I wouldn't like to be an axminster rep or jet rep 'cause there's no answer to the problem; Unless it's changed at the production level.
I'm not an engineer but that's looks a poor design the slot should have been added not cut out of the structural part of the fence!.

 

[WellsWood]

Thanks for the kind comments everyone.

However, whether the tolerances are realistic or not may need debating....

That was kind of what I meant (it was quite late when I typed it up). However bear in mind the paragraph you quoted from concerned the support brackets as well as the fence. These brackets are so not flat on the base (nor are the sides anything like square to the base) that it makes a mockery of then having them slide on cast iron pads with machined flat faces. Expecting the whole assembly to then move across the tables while presenting the fence at a consistent angle to them is therefore a lost cause, and this I do consider a fault since surely this is it's intended purpose. Of course it is possible that Jet (designers at least) could argue that it was always intended to be readjusted at every repositioning - and that was what I meant by "debatable". :-k

- where did you source the brackets by the way?

Chris, its half of one of these with appropriate extra holes drilled and then tidied up on the bench grinder. Used them for no other reason than I had a bunch of them lying around and they looked up to the task.

I'm not an engineer but that's looks a poor design the slot should have been added not cut out of the structural part of the fence!.

I agree Andy, that slot should not be there at all since it seems to be asking for trouble. I raised this exact point with Bob Adsett, Jets engineer, on Friday. It's one of the items he says he intends to discuss with the designer.

Mark

 

[Mike.C]

Scott,

Jake wrote:
Newbie_Neil wrote:
one of the big advantages was the fence. For about the same money as the Jet P/T, which was not available back then, I purchased the Jet 60A jointer which has a cast iron fence. .... Quite a few members have the 60A.


Cast iron doesn't mean flat - it too will have been designed and manufactured to a tolerance.


Could any 60A (or 54A) owner advise just how flat the CI fence on those machines is, preferably with figures? (slightly off the topic of Mark's ally fence but just out of interest since I quite fancy one ...)

As I have already said I own the Jet/Axminster 54A and the fence is absolutely perfect. Why they do not fit these fences to their planer/thicknessers I have no idea, oh yes sorry I forgot they have to make sacrifices don't they. :evil:

Seriously Scott :wink:, if you are in the market for a planer you will not regret getting one of these. IMHO if you can afford it I would go for the 64A because it has the 8 inch wide beds.

Cheers

Mike

 

[Jake]

Why they do not fit these fences to their planer/thicknessers I have no idea, oh yes sorry I forgot they have to make sacrifices don't they. :evil:

The 60A is what, £200 less than this machine, has none of the extra thicknesser mechanisms, table, etc, and this machine has a good deal more cast iron due its extra planing width, and twice as powerful a motor to cope with thicknessing at the added width. I don't think it is surprising that some other area had to give at the price point. Maybe it is the price that is the problem, bned inut then maybe they also think that people won't actually want a cast-iron fence on a machine where it has to be removed every time you want to swap to thickness mode (I assume that is the case).

The fence slot is the same as on my HMS260's fence, which has been flat to my satisfaction (though I didn't go at it with feeler guages, 'cos I don't do that on my work either). That got plywood over it anyway because it is too small, which might help it's flatness spec, I suppose. Also the same on my festool tablesaw, which again are much lower, but they are again flat enough for me. I don't know whether I'd have noticed a .3mm gap though, being a slacker in that kind of way.

 

[JPEC]

I agree Andy, that slot should not be there at all since it seems to be asking for trouble. I raised this exact point with Bob Adsett, Jets engineer, on Friday. It's one of the items he says he intends to discuss with the designer.

Mark

My (charnwood) fence is almost exactly the same design, slot in middle with single skin asking to bend.
I believe my p/t W582 is a chinese copy of the electra 260. Have any leccy owners had this problem or is it because mine is a 'cheap' copy?

Cheers
Julian

 

[JPEC]

Jake, your post wasn't there when I wrote mine

Julian

 

[Mike.C]

Jake,

bned inut then maybe they also think that people won't actually want a cast-iron fence on a machine where it has to be removed every time you want to swap to thickness mode (I assume that is the case).

I can only speak for myself, but if I owned the same P/T as Mark I wouldn't see removing a cast iron fence every time I changed to thicknesser mode as a problem, and if it came down to pound notes, I would certainly pay a little extra for this type of fence to be included in the box. But as I have said I can only speak for myself.

My last planer, a Elektra Beckum 260M P/T (the green open leg model), which I still have, has a ally fence, it is absolute cr-p. This is one of the reason's I went for my Jet 54A, and I now use the P/T as a dedicated thicknesser.
If you search this forum, or better still google you will see absolutely countless people moaning about ally fences.

Now IMHO I personally have the ideal setup, but then again, someone else will think different.

Cheers

Mike

 

[WellsWood]

Jake and Mike, (and anyone else who's interested)
just for your info, the fence assembly remains in place on the Jet when changing modes. The whole lot rides on the flat tops of the castings that form the hinges.

It looks like this when it's closed:


...and like this when it's open:


it takes about 15 seconds to change from one to the other, and like I said, you don't have to remove (or find a new home for) anything! \/

With hindsight I probably should have posted these pictures at the outset. Would've made things a lot clearer for many I'm sure, but I've only just got a handle on the process in the last couple of days.

Mark

 

[Jake]

if I owned the same P/T as Mark I wouldn't see removing a cast iron fence every time I changed to thicknesser mode as a problem

Nor would I, it was idle conjecture on another reason they might have. But then again, I might after the first time I dropped it or knocked it over... They're a bit safer permanently attached to a machine.

and if it came down to pound notes, I would certainly pay a little extra for this type of fence to be included in the box.

Presumably they are aiming at a price point against competition. Maybe an optional upgrade would be a way around it for them.

I'd certainly consider buying an upgrade for my old-style hms260 if Scheppach or an aftermarket supplier came out with one. Not for the flatness so much as the whole flimsy bracket arrangement. Can't say I'd want it to be cast iron at all though.

Now IMHO I personally have the ideal setup, but then again, someone else will think different.

Absolutely, the long tables would be nice, the weight is a no-no for me in my current cellar shop, but the width of the 54, and even the 60, is the killer for me. I'll have to wait for that FS32 or whatever.

 

[Mike.C]

Jake, I forgot to say above that when I need to plane anything over 150mm I clamp a piece of 25mm ply to the old fence and hey presto I have got a 10 inch planer.

By the way what is the FS32?

Mark,

I really do like the way that the fence stays in place.

How is it now that you have put it right?

Cheers

Mike