Just read this: “Unlike planing, you need not pay close attention to the direction of the grain-a sharp scraper will work quite well against the grain.”
Do those of you who use a scraper regularly agree with this statement?? This isn’t an idle question! Am working on some maple right now, and really would like to know.
forestgirl — you can take the girl out of the forest, but you can’t take the forest out of the girl 😉
Another proud member of the “I Rocked With ToolDoc Club” …. :>)
Replies
A scarper will work much better against the grain than a plane. That doesn't mean that it will work perfectly all the time. If a scraper lifts the grain and I can't go the other way, I'll skew it away from the original cut and try again. Often, you can greatly improve scraper performance against the grain by skewing one way or the other.
If all else fails, there's sandpaper.
"If all else fails, there's sandpaper." Ach! Blasphemy! [Just kidding] I'm so hoping to get the scraping thing down well enough to avoid sanding this maple. Although it's not particularly "figured" still, it didn't do so well going through the planer. Thanks for the info.forestgirl -- you can take the girl out of the forest, but you can't take the forest out of the girl ;-)Another proud member of the "I Rocked With ToolDoc Club" .... :>)
Scrapers can be a great surfacing tool but you need to know how to get a very sharp curl on the edge. You can work both ways on the grain but cross grain isn't a good idea. People can get carried away with a scraper. Summer wood is softer than winter growth and it's easy to scrape an uneven surface. Because planer marks are ridges, the scraper can hop along them, taking many passes and resulting in the above. Glass smooth surfaces are difficult to finish. Most professional finishes recommend sanding no finer than 180. You need a little tooth on the surface for adhesion and stain penetration. I'd use a hand sander 100, 120, 150 and call it good on your maple project.
Beat it to fit / Paint it to match
So, maybe I'll use the scraper to get past some of the micro-tear-out that's present (not sure what caused that) and then go to sanding? Would prefer not to using sanding for all the material removal.
Besides that, Tom (tms) taught me how to sharpen the scraper way last March or somethin' and it's about time I put it to use! <g>
forestgirl -- you can take the girl out of the forest, but you can't take the forest out of the girl ;-)Another proud member of the "I Rocked With ToolDoc Club" .... :>)
Edited 12/12/2005 12:57 pm by forestgirl
Glass smooth surfaces are difficult to finish. Most professional finishes recommend sanding no finer than 180. You need a little tooth on the surface for adhesion and stain penetration.
I've heard the same thing with regard to sanding, but not so much with scraping. I thought that what you want to avoid is burnishing the surface, which makes both finishing and gluing difficult. I'd not heard the same about a surface planed or scraped glass smooth with a sharp blade.
The closest I've heard to this in modern practice is that some think toothing the surface for veneer adhesion is a good idea, but most seem to feel that smooth is the best practice for modern glues.
Maybe this is dependent on the sort of glue used in the bond?My goal is for my work to outlast me. Expect my joinery to get simpler as time goes by.
I'll be interested to see if anyone (Richard, you out there?) chimes in and breaks the tie on this burnishing thing. I, too, am more familiar with that caution with regard to sanding, not scraping.
Richard, where are you?!forestgirl -- you can take the girl out of the forest, but you can't take the forest out of the girl ;-)Another proud member of the "I Rocked With ToolDoc Club" .... :>)
It all does depend a bit on what you're after fg. The very finely sanded surfaces of wood can be counterproductive, but not always.
For a start there's sanding to a level appropriate to the wood texture. Coarse, ring porous or open grained woods like the oaks, ash, elm etc., don't really benefit from sanding to anything much beyond about 150- 180 grit. The coarse open pores are generally bigger than the abrasive size at 220 grit and up, so what's the point of sanding this fine and beyond?
Here's another scenario. Let's say you want to stain a diffuse porous, fine grained or medium coarse woods like maple, walnut or mahogany. Again you have to ask the question about wood pore size and grit size, and at what point is sanding with finer grits productive? With staining you deposit not only dye colour to the wood cells, but pigment lodges in any crevices that exist either naturally or unnaturally in the wood.
Natural crevices such as the coarse open grain of oak will hold the pigments. To find open crevices in fine grained woods you need to create them. So if you sand maple to 120 grit you create big crevices, and if you sand to 220 grit you create smaller crevices: yet maple is often prone to blotching due to the common mix of exposed open pores that allow stain pigment lodging and closed pores that will resist the lodging of stain pigments. The pigments are concentrated more evenly in maple when it's all sanded to 120 grit striations and less concentrated and intense in patches (due to mix of closed and open pores) when they lodge in 220 grit striations. The dye element works as before, but the pigments mostly get wiped off at the dry ragging off stage of applying the colourant.
There are requirements for some finishes to have a bit of a key to grab on to. Water based finishes and oil based varnishes tend to need this key. They'll lock themselves well onto a coarse or medium grained wood like oaks in the first group or walnut in the latter category because there are natural crevices to grip on to. The crevices are less pronounced in fine grained woods like maple, cherry and sycamore. This is where the advice to not sand too fine comes in, with about 180 grit or 220 grit being the finest grit often suggested. And in truth it's very hard to see the grit striations underneath a clear film of water based or oil based varnish or polish even at 150 or 180 grit, so again why bother sanding much beyond that grade?
On the other hand if you apply (pigment) stain over 120 grit sanding and compare that to the same stain applied over 220 grit sanding you can definitely see the difference even through a subsequent varnish or polish.
Going back to creating a key for film varnishes to grip to and the very fine sanding question on fine grained woods, a way to help create that key is to thin out the first coat or two of varnish with the appropriate thinner by anything up to 60%. This, on application, will help the varnish penetrate the upper few cells of the wood because the thinner penetrates better than the varnish alone. Rubbing down between these initial coats with something like 180 grit paper then helps form the key. Personally I think this is creating extra work for little or no gain, but that's just my experience and opinion.
Moving on to the question of sanding turned objects and the more pronounced visible striations I can offer this analogy. Take a sharp knife and score a line across the grain of a flat piece of wood. Score a second line to cross the first line that goes with the grain of the wood. Then do a bit of planing, scraping and sanding with the grain to remove the scored lines. Apply some polish. Which line is most visible, and why do you think that is?
And lastly on to scraping. Yes, scrapers are often effective where planes no longer will do the job. I suspect it has a lot to do with the fact that the cutting edge is very fine and a scraper has very little lift to the cut. It's just rolling the severed grain over on itself rather than lifting it vertically. I can't say that this is a fact, but I suspect this is something to do with the effectiveness of scrapers, and it probably has a lot to do with the geometry of the cutting action. Of couse scrapers are often not great tools around soft stringy woods like some of the Shorea group of woods. They are often frustrating when used on woods with a mix of hard and soft growth rings like many pines, but they can certainly be a useful tool.
This last bit has got nothing to do with anything said before really, but I do find the statements from many that they polish straight off the plane or scraper rather implausible. I've been whacking wood, prepping it and polishing the bloody stuff for more decades than I care to remember really, and I'll only polish straight off the plane if I want that slightly uneven or scalloped rustic look. In the highest quality work I've always found it necessary to do at least a little sanding, even if only a bit of a touch up with 180 grit prior to polishing.
That's enough of my verbal spew for at least a couple of days, ha, ha. I've got real work to do here. Slainte.
Richard Jones Furniture
Edited 12/13/2005 5:32 pm by SgianDubh
Hey, Richard, thanks! I knew we could drag you back in from the pub, LOL!
"The pigments are concentrated more evenly in maple when it's all sanded to 120 grit striations and less concentrated and intense in patches ...when they lodge in 220 grit striations." I'm not sure I'm reading this part correctly. Are you saying that if you go all the way to 220, you're liable to get patches where the color is less concentrated therefore (extrapolating here) the staining would be uneven?
Thanks for clarifying. I might have more questions later!forestgirl -- you can take the girl out of the forest, but you can't take the forest out of the girl ;-)Another proud member of the "I Rocked With ToolDoc Club" .... :>)
Yes fg, that's what I'm saying. Hard maple is prone to blotching due to the difference between the exposed end grain take up of colouring mediums (stain or dye) and the take up exhibited by vascular tissue that runs parallel with the surface.
By sanding to a coarse grit, say 120, you provide lots of places for the colouring agent to lodge, including both the exposed ends of vascular tissue and the coarse sanded side walls of vascular tissue (that doesn't normally take up colouring agents as effectively.)
Sanding to a fine grit, e.g., 220-240- 280, etc., doesn't prevent the exposed end grain taking up colour, and nor does sanding to only 120 grit, but the 120 grit does provide a key for colouring agents in the usually less absorbent areas.
It doesn't even out the colouring job entirely, but it can help. Also you can actually physically see the coarse 120 grit striations, which may not be the desired effect.
Incidentally, sanding only to a coarser grit is a well known technique for magnifying the effect, intensity and deepening of the colour uptake of pigment stains for pretty much all fine grained woods (i think.) The trick is to achieve a balance between colourant uptake and visible sanding striations. Slainte.Richard Jones Furniture
I've not noticed this blotchiness with tung oil. Is this effect less pronounced here than with an in-the-wood stain? It's sort of surprising to me, since what you're talking about with blotching stains is differing absorption, and an oil finish is all uptake.My goal is for my work to outlast me. Expect my joinery to get simpler as time goes by.
Oil, like water follows convenient pathways. Open pores are like drain pipe ends. The relatively closed vascular tissues running parallel with the face of the board are like the side of drain pipes-- the water (or oil, stain, dye, polish) tends to just bounce off. Slainte.Richard Jones Furniture
That's sort of what I'm getting at. Your explanation makes sense, and I've seen it from others, but while I've seen blotchiness with staining I've not seen it with hand-rubbed, nonpigmented (and non-dyeing) oil. Just seems counterintuitive, given the mechanism.My goal is for my work to outlast me. Expect my joinery to get simpler as time goes by.
Isn't the effect you get with the oil enhancing the grain effectively the "blotchiness" issue manifesting itself in a better looking way? In other words, I assumed the reason the oil accentuates the grain is that it is absorbed differently but doesn't give you those funky color patches that result when using an actual stain. Again, this is my assumption, and nothing more.
Interesting question, OC. Hopefully one of the finishing guru's will answer. I suspect light reflectivity comes in there somehoe, but not sure how.forestgirl -- you can take the girl out of the forest, but you can't take the forest out of the girl ;-)Another proud member of the "I Rocked With ToolDoc Club" .... :>)
Jamie -Here's another twist on the scraper vs sanding issue.this ipe i've been working with is so, soooooo oily. That's the only description I can give it. For the face rail of this bench I'm making I used a 3/8" rounding over bit in the router. Got a little too aggressive on the last cut and had a slight bit of machine mark to sand out along the length of the board. Sand paper gummed up in less than a few strokes! Scraper managed to do the trick magnificently! Much better finish on this material than sandpaper.From all that I've done sanding vs scraping I suspect it has a lot to do with the particular type of wood you're working with, as well as the grain orientation.
Hammer1 -I read time and time again about sanding to 150, or the "extreme" 220 to get a decent surface for finishing. This amazes me. I routinely sand to at least 320 and more often to 600 grit on turned objects and yet I'll still see sanding marks on the piece under strong raking light.Is this because on turned objects we're dealing with sanding across the grain rather than with it as is more customary in flatwork as opposed to turned pieces? Obviously I'm not that accomplished at either end of the woodworking spectrum. Just trying to understand how 150 grit sanding can be sufficient for a clear coat finish.Thanks
Edited 12/12/2005 10:15 pm ET by DennisS
I guess I've opened a can of worms with the sanding issue vs scraping. My comments were specific to FG's maple picture frame. Maple is a blotch prone wood because the grain is open in some areas and closed in others. The open portions will absorb oil based stain more readily than the adjacent smooth grain areas. By sanding or scraping the surface to a very fine level, the difference will be enhanced. The open portions will still absorb almost like end grain but the smooth area will be less able to accept the stain. If FG wants to avoid the blotchyness (is this a word?) and get a more uniform color then I would not recommend fine sanding or scraping. Coarser fibers will help with accepting the stain. Using a pre-stain conditioner will help to seal the open grain so that it won't absorb the color as much.When you use products, I think it's a good idea to read and follow the manufacturers recommendations. The manufacturers recommendation for some of the professional finishes I use, clearly state sanding no finer than 150. The back of the cans of the Minwax stains I have also state sanding to 150-180. This is not a professional finish but the statement is clearly written on the can. Below are a couple of sites where sanding preparation is stated. You may have to scroll down some of the pages. There is also some good information on finishing problems but much of it has to do with spraying specific finishes.DennisS, you are talking about cross grain scratches which is a different matter. It takes a lot of work with each successive grit to remove the previous scratches. Because you are putting finer and finer cross grain scratches on a turning you have to go very fine to make them invisible to the eye. Most folks think a great top coat comes off a gun but that is just a method for consistent application. If you block out your top coat, buff and polish it, you won't be able to see any sanding marks unless they are coarse and/or cross grain. The exception is a french polish finish which is polished as you apply it. There is nothing wrong with sanding or scraping a surface to the Nth degree but the eye will have a hard time seeing sanding marks much finer than 180. When you look at raw wood that has been planed or scraped, the cut surface reflects light and is pleasing to the eye. However, when you put a top coat on the surface, it reflects light. Personally, I have to get out the extra strong glasses to tell the difference on a finished surface. Going beyond 220 isn't worth the extra work for me and if I have an adhesion problem with some of the top coats I use, it could be due to the surface being too smooth.Scrapers work on hardwoods but they don't do so well on softwoods. It's not easy to get a perfect edge and curl on a scraper every time. As you use it, any grit that is on the surface can put nicks in the edge. It's possible that using a dull scraper will scratch the work worse than coarse sandpaper. When you start and stop with one, you could leave a cut that will be very visible, this happens more often when the curl is bent over too much and you flex the card too much. They also cut more deeply in the softer summer wood. Figured woods can easily get dished out with too many passes with a card scraper. You may not notice this happening until the piece is finished and you look at it from the side. This is why scraper planes are a better option, not to mention the hot fingers and inconsistent angles you can get with a card scraper. I would not try to remove pock marks and tear outs with a card scraper unless you want a wavy surface.To avoid tear out on the planer you need sharp knives. Some will change the angle of the bevel on their planer knives, just like a york pitch plane. Most are beveled for a wide range of wood and are a compromise. Knives sharpened by a grinder really aren't sharp. They have striations that are the same as the grit on the grinding wheel, they are also a bit scalloped. Many pro shops use wide belt sanding machines with difficult woods. Sanding won't tear out grain like a knife will. When using a planer with difficult woods, dampening the surface a bit will help a little with tear out. Of course, with any wood you need to know which way the prevailing grain is running. Run against the grain and you will almost certainly get pocking. You can hear it popping whether on the jointer or in the planer.
http://www.lenmar-coatings.com/tech.htm
http://www.deftfinishes.com/professional/solving.html#twentytwo
http://www.seagravecoatings.com/Trouble2.htm
http://www.hardwood.org/display_article.asp?ID=294
Beat it to fit / Paint it to match
Thanks, Hammer, for taking the time to provide all of that information! I'm on my way to Ocean Shores to pick up my "new" pellet stove (Thanks, "Migraine") but will review and check out those links when I get back.forestgirl -- you can take the girl out of the forest, but you can't take the forest out of the girl ;-)Another proud member of the "I Rocked With ToolDoc Club" .... :>)
Hammer -Thanks for the detailed comments on sanding vs scraping. Sometimes the obvious, as in sanding a turning on the lathe, is .... well, all too obvious once it's pointed out. I'm thinking it would be to advantage to stop the lathe and do the final sanding parallel to the grain from now on.
Dennis, on turned pieces sand to 220 grit first, stop the lathe and sand with 220 along the grain until the scratch marks disapear.Then you can sand with the lathe on any finer grits you wish. Depending on the wood.I usually sand to 320 then burnish with shavings.Softwoods I stop at 180,sand along the grain with 180 and burnish.
You won't see any scratches this way.
mike
Thanks for the reply, Mike. I'll start doing more "with the grain" sanding from now on.
When you sand across the grain, it shows up a lot more because you're cutting the fibers with the grit. When you sand with the grain, any marks will be parallel to most of the fibers and less visible. The particles in most stains will not have a place to go on wood that has been sanded too smooth. The irregular grain (open cells from deviations in direction in one area and not in the adjoining areas) is the reason maple, birch and other woods with irregular grain look blotchy when stained without a sealer coat.
"I cut this piece four times and it's still too short."
Edited 1/4/2006 12:09 am by highfigh
The statement is correct, but angle the scraper across the grain if need be.The scraper will work best with the grain, I have used a scraper directly against the grain. One instance would be a table with bread board ends.Go with the frain when possible,skew on an angle when not possible and go against the grain when you have no other choice.
mike
I've noticed on softer woods with a scraper that it will tear out and make the wood quite fuzzy. But i'll get it real smooth going with the grain. So i'll always try and go with the grain, just so i won't cause any tear out. And when the scraper works you know it.
Jamie -
I've had equal luck scraping in either direction. The high angle of the scraper seems to handle squirrely grain much better than a plane blade would. I'll angle the scraper with respect to the direction of the grain first to one side then the other. This seems to even out the waves since you're 'crossing the wake' so to speak.
The 'micro' tearout you're experiencing under the planer is not uncommon. At least for me. I'd like to be able to tell you what's causing it but can't. When I've encountered it, doesn't seem to matter which direction I send the board through the machine, I'll still get little 'pits' in the surface. Most annoying I agree.
"Most annoying I agree." I used a little stronger language than that, rest assured! I've not had this problem with oak, walnut, alder or poplar (that I remember anywho), but definitely with this maple.
I've got to improve my scraper sharpening technique -- seems I have to really tilt the scraper quite a bit to get those fine shavings everyone talks about. Looking at the edge (before drawing the hook) I'm thinking maybe I needed to clean it up more before drawing the hook. Maybe the hook is way off angle-wise too, I dunno. forestgirl -- you can take the girl out of the forest, but you can't take the forest out of the girl ;-)Another proud member of the "I Rocked With ToolDoc Club" .... :>)
Forest Girl, if you prepared the scraper correctly you only have to tilt the scraper between 5 and 15°.Try this method, start all over again. Drawfile the scraper. Drawfiling is pulling a double cut fine file at a 45° angle over the card scraper. Place it in a vice with 1/4" showing.Hold the file level,pull it towards you on an angle.Do this four times, remove ,turn and repeat on the other sides.Hone the card the same way, four times with a fine stone,I use a diamond stone,any stone will do.
Place card flat on the bench, let it stick out about an 1/8". Put a drop of oil on the burnisher.Pretend you are spreading cold stick butter on a roll,this is all the pressure you need. More pressure than this willgive unsatisfactory results.
Lay burnisher on card and pull,then push ,repeat. Four times is enough,two pulls and two pushes. Turn card over and repeat.Do all four sides.
Place card on bench, same way as before,1/8" beyond bench. Hold burnisher vertical,tilt top of burnisher 5 to 10° towards bench.Pull ,push ,pull ,push. Repeat on other sides.
Now try the card scraper, I think you will be very happy with the results.When you need to redo the card, only repeat the last two steps.Eventually you will have to repeat the entire process.
mike
I assume when you describe spreading hard butter, you are holding the burnisher flat on the scraper to draw the edge. Is this correct?
Don, I use that amount of pressure on each phase. The burnisher lays flat on the scraper after the drawfiling and honing. Then the scraper is still flat on the bench ,but the burnisher is held nearly vertical.The cold butter thing is the best I could come up with for the amount of pressure. Though I believe it is pretty accurate description.
Always err on the lighter amount of pressure if you are not sure. Even burnishing with too light a pressure will work better than a heavy pressure that produces a pronounced hook. It may seem that the heavy hook will work better, but the opposite is true.
After a short learning curve you will know how much pressure for you to use. Also ,some scrapers are harder than others, makes no difference. Still use the same "cold butter"amount of pressure.
mike
I took a course with Phil Lowe at Highland Harware in Atlanta where he said he teaches his students to use the point on the end of a burnisher (which he creates by taking the rod out of the handle, putting it in a drill press, and holding a file against the end to sharpen it like a pencil) and very lightly drags this point against the lenghth of the burr afterit is turned on the card scraper in the way you describe. In this way, the burr will cut with the scraper inclined only about 15 degrees from vertical. Otherwise, you have to almost lay the scraper flat to within 30 degrees of the wood surface (70 degrees from vertical) to get the burr to engage and cut nice fine shavings. This does work, but sometimes the point of the burnisher will slip when I try to drag it along the burr.
Jay
Jamie, there are scraper situations that defy what would appear to be "with the grain" in maple and other woods. Make sure your scraper has the right bur for your use and try it for best result. Sometimes pushing works better than dragging and vice versa. I have used a scraper on finished wood to remove fuzz and then sprayed again with good result, never actually touching the wood but the finish only. Some woods like to have their direction of scrape, plane, even sand reversed. go figure. Its really an experiential mode without a definite "always do it this way." I could have said it in less words, but like scraping wood, there are so many options. aloha, mike
<<"...Make sure your scraper has the right bur ...">>
Agree. When scraping properly, make sure you put a decent hook on the scraper with a burnishing rod. When properly burred and held ~70º you will be scraping off thin wispy shavings; if you are getting sawdust, you need to reburnish your hook. I just did a a pile of birdseye maple for some picture frames (helping out Santa... what can I say). I started with a 4.5 smoothing plane and a York-pitch frog and then scraped the heavily figured wood with nice results. The only area that I had trouble with is the small break through knots- which I will sand and fill.Glaucon
If you don't think too good, then don't think too much...
A scraper works irrelevant of the grain direction, and it leaves you a prettier surface than you can ever get by sanding.
Yes, it's "prettier" but the question has arisen: Does it provide the right kind of surface for stain. Seems to depend a great deal on the type of wood. Maybe after the holidays, I'll take a few different types of the harder woods (walnut, oak, maple, and ?) and try some experimenting with scraper vs. 120 grit vs. 180 grit vs. 320 grit, see what the results are.forestgirl -- you can take the girl out of the forest, but you can't take the forest out of the girl ;-)Another proud member of the "I Rocked With ToolDoc Club" .... :>)
Scraped wood will take stain real well. You still have a cut, absorbant surface, same as when sanded, just more of your cut grain edges are on nearly the same plane. You will like the difference.
It's the tiny bur that does the cutting on a scraper. The bur will cut any direction but best with the grain. This makes it difficult to cut deep and pry up the grain (the cause of tear out). Things happen slowly with a scraper and be careful not to burn your finger tips.
Hey Jamie,
I just stumbled upon this thread. Wow! you certainly got a lot of responses.
You've gotten a lot of good advice here, so I'll just add a couple items.
First, yes, you can scrape in any direction, although often you'll get better results in one rather than another. Don't be afraid to try various directions in order to get the result you want.
Second, if you're having trouble, my first guess is that your scraper has gone dull. You should be getting nearly transparent shavings, NOT dust. If you're burning your fingers, sharpen. The hook on a scraper is a tenuous thing, and needs to be sharpened often, compared to a plane. A dull scraper also contributes to burnishing the wood, which you've already read can lead to an uneaven finish.
Last, I'd be happy to look over your work, if you want to stop by the shop, and give you my two bit consultation. It would be a welcome break from sheet rocking and painting the new finishing room. (I HATE PUTTNG UP SHEET ROCK!!)
Tom
Oh, BTW Scraping a dyed surface is an excellent way to finish curly maple. It really brings out the depth.
Edited 12/30/2005 5:53 pm ET by tms
Hey, Tom, thanks for the tips!
Sounds like you need one of those gizmos that holds the sheet rock up for you? I'd volunteer to help, but my back would never forgive me.
One of these days when I'm on your side of the water, I'll schedule a pizza session and bring my scraper and some wood. I've vowed to do work only for myself for the next couple of months so I can have some fun instead of fretting over other people's projects and then have them change their mind about what they want or even whether they want it. Ridiculous!
Well, with one exception: I want to make a side table for my employee and her just-passed-by anniversary. Scraper might come in handy on that project.
You have a great New Year's ya hear? We were supposed to go up and visit Dennis and Robbie, but they are both sick so we're staying far, far away.forestgirl -- you can take the girl out of the forest, but you can't take the forest out of the girl ;-)Another proud member of the "I Rocked With ToolDoc Club" .... :>)
Hey Jamie,The sheetrrock is done. Thanks Almighty! I really hate that stuff. I've also textured and painted the walls and ceiling, also NOT my favorites. Next, will come the electrical which I don't mind. Then, I'm going to knock off working ON the shop, and spend some time working IN the shop.You're welcome to stop by any time, to marval at my new (and nearly finished) finishing room.Tom
"...knock off working ON the shop, and spend some time working IN the shop." Amen!forestgirl -- you can take the girl out of the forest, but you can't take the forest out of the girl ;-)Another proud member of the "I Rocked With ToolDoc Club" .... :>)
Hi Tom -I know I shan't covet my neighbor's .... erm .... but I certainly covet your finishing room! After agonizing over the design and layout of my shop I now realize some thought should have been given to finishing. I doubt that hand rubbed varnished finishes will ever be a 'feature' of my woodworking at least in my current setup.I share your lack of passion for drywall work! Dirty, messy and (I am) so sloppy at it. I can't believe you textured that finishing area! (grin). I had little choice since the existing drywall in this place had an obnoxiously heavy spray texture so I was complelled to match it where necessary patches, etc., were done. I opted to buy a hopper and to try to learn to use it. I've never in my life dealt with anything that creates as big a mess as that thing! Of all the texture spray I've used to date, probably 10% at the most ended up on the inteded surface. Take heart, though; once it's all done you'll look back and think "Man, I'll *never* do that again. (hahaha)Happy NewYear, bud.
Hey Dennis,Sheetrock is done. Most of the electrical is done, just the exhaust fan and the incandescent track lights left. I'm gonna take a break before I start on the doors, cabinets and bench. I've got three bows to finish, and a bow case to build.I'll eventually post some pictures of the finished room, but you're welcome to check it out yourself.Tom
I didn't read though all the replies, but I'm assuming you got the answer to your question.
On a related note, I find that my Stanley #80 cabinet scraper offers a little more utility (and no burned fingers!) than a card scraper for doing what you are attempting.
So far, I've not gone about it so vigorously as to get a warm, let alone hot, scraper. When I'm doing a table-top or something like that, flexing my muscles and feeling like a pro, I'll probably get the Lee Valley Veritas scraper holder. [Or make my own]
forestgirl -- you can take the girl out of the forest, but you can't take the forest out of the girl ;-)Another proud member of the "I Rocked With ToolDoc Club" .... :>)
Edited 1/5/2006 1:35 pm by forestgirl
That Veritas scraper holder is really handy, I have one and recomend it. The #80 still works better for removing lot's of material but it's in addition to a card scraper and not a replacement for.
I guess folk's opinions will differ, but I got one of the Veritas card scraper holders and I didn't care too much for it.
I like to get my thumbs right down near the wood and I like to be able to adjust the flex of the scraper on the fly. The holder made it difficult to do both.
It's not a big investment, but if you know sombody who has one I'd recommend taking it for a spin before you buy it.
I'd give you mine, but I already gave it away!
David C
This forum post is now archived. Commenting has been disabled