Road test of the FETool.

**RETIRED** · 4th October 2010, 01:46 PM

When someone makes a claim that one tool will replace a roughing gouge, a skew chisel and a bowl gouge then it gets my attention pretty rapidly and I have to try it.

I received Franks latest tool that he has been talking about here The tamed skew

Although I use traditional tools I keep an open mind about new tools and am always on the lookout for a tool that does a job quicker, easier and safer. If it does those then it is a sound investment that saves me money, hence my testing and subsequent purchase of the Easyrougher Ci1 discussed previously, a tool that made the claim it hogged out quicker and longer than any thing else on bowls. I don't use it on bowls but on big spindles it lives up to its blurb.

All opinions are my personal point of view and the following tests are done looking at the tool from a production turners and teachers point of view. If it can make a job easier to teach a student proper techniques then it is worthwhile as an aid.

When I first saw the pictures of the FETool (my name for it), something clicked in the brain that I had seen something similar many years ago but wasn't sure. A friend was down over the weekend and saw it and said, "Ah, the Vic Wood oops tool". I had seen Vic using this tool to get the sharp edge on the lids of his boxes. The "oops" part comes from the fact that a slightly heavy cut will spin it over.

The tool consists of a hexagonal shaft machined at one end to accept a square Tungsten Carbide Cutter with the leading side edge having a small radius to the point.

First impressions of the tool were that it felt good in the hands and was well made.

A few flaws in design for the purpose were evident. One of the rules of woodturning is "The cutting edge must be supported on the tool rest." This cannot happen with this tool unless it is tilted to the side. The bevels are too blunt at 30 degrees.

Easy Rougher Ci!
Attachment 149334
FETool.
Attachment 149333

As this tool was developed in part from seeing the Easy Wood Easy Rougher Ci1 a few comparisons are inevitable.

We shall start with roughing out. My definition of roughing out is, “Removal of unwanted stock in a safe, quick and efficient manner.”

The normal roughing gouge of any shape (U or spindle) in practised hands will remove the edges of a 45 mm X 45 mm x 250mm red gum spindle in about 15-20 seconds. It can also be used to rough form the intended shape of larger curves. It leaves a finish that can be sanded with about 150# paper. It uses a cutting or slicing action.

The Easy Rougher uses a scraping action and takes a fraction longer than a gouge and a little longer to put curves in because of the 15mm square front. It leaves a reasonable finsh with some effort and light cuts. You would probably start with 100# paper.

Going by Franks picture of roughing out his walking stick I started by using the tool this way with the cutter upppermost. This is a scraping action.
Attachment 149340

This is all right if you take small cuts.
Attachment 149335
The tool feels unsteady and if you get aggressive it results in a huge catch with torn grain.
Attachment 149336
It took 265 seconds to rough out. The finish was a little rough and would need 80# paper to smooth.

A better way to get slightly aggressive is to angle the cutter but if the back of the cutter contacts timber before you have the cut started it twists backwards. It is scraping.

Attachment 149338Direction of cut is to left or towards headstock.
It took 81 seconds to rough out and the finish would require 80# paper.

The next way we tried was with the tool sitting on an angle with the tool supported by the flat on the hex bar.
Attachment 149337

The cutting edge is still not supported and the tool reacted by wanting to twist if a half decent cut was attempted. You have to rub the bevel to maintain an even cut otherwise it wants to go deeper which results in it coming to a complete stop in the cut. Another problem is that with the bevel rubbing you get a lot of chatter from the square section of the timber.

This is a slicing cut but because of the angle of the cutter, it does not perform well.

It took 265 seconds to rough out and the finish was terrible as the the angle tended to pull out the grain.

The next way was to use the tool upside down (ala bedan) with the cutter facing towards the timber and the tool slightly angled to get a slicing cut.
Attachment 149339

This can take an aggressive cut but the low angle at the front and the narrowness of the tool requires a "balancing act" between forcing the tool to cut and not allowing the back corner to dig in like a skew chisel.

Roughing time was 107 seconds with picked out grain needing 80# paper to clean up.

The skew chisel is used for smoothing or planing cuts, peeling cuts, V cuts for the purpose of marking out, rolling a bead, rounding the end of cylinders, fine tuning fillets, long curves and cutting beads.
These can also be accomplished with an appropriately sharpened spindle or bowl gouge as well and in some cases are preferable because of timber structure. Red Gum and Blackwood spring to mind.

The first test with the FETool is smoothing a cylinder.

The one on the left is done with a skew, the next is using the FETool as a skew. This is difficult because of the narrowness of the cutter and the bevel.
Attachment 149346
This one is using it as a bedan.
Attachment 149341
Bedan scraping.
Attachment 149343
Using FETool as a scraper.
Attachment 149348

The finish left after each of these cuts is a little rough and does not compare to the finish off a skew.

I rounded the end of the cylinder with the FETool using a skew cut, a “bedan” type cut and scraping with the cutter up. Surface of timber was ok in all cases but it took about 10 times longer than with a normal skew.
Attachment 149347]Sorry about pic quality.
The bedan type cut tends to bog down if you take too heavy a cut.

The next cuts were V cuts.

Normal skew on left, FETool on right.
Attachment 149349
Both the skew and FETool did this ok but it is harder to get a sharper “base” with the FETool and placement to start the cut is critical otherwise a screwcut results.

Next were beads. The angle of the bevel makes it hard to get in without hitting an adjoining bead and is a bit of a balancing act again to avoid catches. The base does not have the crispness you get with a skew or lady finger type gouge.

Skew on the left and FETool on right.
Attachment 149342
Next on the list was cleaning up a fillet.

Skew on left, catch from FETool and FETool on right.
Attachment 149344
The FETool was hard to use in this because in order to get a clean cut it must be sliced and with the FETool in skew mode you are balancing on a corner of the hex bar and on entry to the cut wants to twist a bit. The slight radius of the cutter makes it hard to get a clean entry.

In bedan mode the same applies about the cutter. You have a slightly bigger footprint.

Finally we come to the peeling cut.

In bedan mode The FETool did reasonably well but because of the weight (or lack of it) in the tool it tended to vibrate badly.

In Normal mode with the cutter up, it cut well but if you move a fraction towards the solid timber well you can see what happens.

Skew on left, normal in centre and bedan on right.
Attachment 149345

The next test was hollowing a box.

The tool did not like doing this cut aggressively at all. Any cut larger than this
Attachment 149540 Attachment 149541
resulted in the tool rolling over and catching.
Attachment 149549

It did not matter how the tool was presented it did not cut well at all.

The final test was doing a bowl. The timber used for this was oak.

Again the problem was catching if more than a mild cut was used.

Small cut.Attachment 149544

Catch Attachment 149546

It worked reasonably well as a scraper but a light touch was needed.
Attachment 149547

Shear scraping was not as successful. I feel that this was because the cutter was getting a bit blunt.
Attachment 149548

I did not do the inside of a bowl as the results would have been the same as end grain hollowing.

A tool should cut almost by itself if used properly with little effort on the part of the turner but you are forever fighting this tool.

In conclusion I do not think this tool will replace any tool and in the hands of a beginner could be very frustrating and even a little dangerous.

**Sturdee** · 7th October 2010, 02:44 PM

At 's invitation I had a tryout of F & E's new tool. purposely did not talk to me about it so he could not influence me prior to my tests and the tool was unhandled.

Using redgum blanks I first roughed a blank to round, then cut V shapes and rolled beads. The roughed down finish was not as smooth as my roughing gouge produces but acceptable. The V cuts were not as deep as with the skew and the beads were not as smooth as with a skew. Because of the shape I could not roll very acute beads.

I had some dig ins with the tool and because of the shaft shape it had a tendency to twist over and dig in on the side to side cutting movement. This is because the acute trapezoidal shape means the side edges are not supported directly by the tool rest.

I then used it to hollow out an edge grain box. Again I had to fight the tendency to twist on the side way movements and had quite a bit of chatter. Inside side finish was acceptable but would require a fair bit of sanding.

I then repeated the same tests using my Bedan tool holding it the same way.

On each test the finish was smoother and easier to use. With the Bedan the side cutting edge is more acute which means that the side cutting edge is still sufficiently supported by the tool rest so that instead of fighting to keep the tool level all I had to do was guide it.

Upon reflection I feel that as a beginner's tool the Bedan would be better as it is easier to use and gives a smoother surface (and can be sharpened) whilst learning to use the skew.

Peter.

**Sturdee** · 7th October 2010, 02:44 PM

At 's invitation I had a tryout of F & E's new tool. purposely did not talk to me about it so he could not influence me prior to my tests and the tool was unhandled.

Using redgum blanks I first roughed a blank to round, then cut V shapes and rolled beads. The roughed down finish was not as smooth as my roughing gouge produces but acceptable. The V cuts were not as deep as with the skew and the beads were not as smooth as with a skew. Because of the shape I could not roll very acute beads.

I had some dig ins with the tool and because of the shaft shape it had a tendency to twist over and dig in on the side to side cutting movement. This is because the acute trapezoidal shape means the side edges are not supported directly by the tool rest.

I then used it to hollow out an edge grain box. Again I had to fight the tendency to twist on the side way movements and had quite a bit of chatter. Inside side finish was acceptable but would require a fair bit of sanding.

I then repeated the same tests using my Bedan tool holding it the same way.

On each test the finish was smoother and easier to use. With the Bedan the side cutting edge is more acute which means that the side cutting edge is still sufficiently supported by the tool rest so that instead of fighting to keep the tool level all I had to do was guide it.

Upon reflection I feel that as a beginner's tool the Bedan would be better as it is easier to use and gives a smoother surface (and can be sharpened) whilst learning to use the skew.

Peter.

**Sturdee** · 7th October 2010, 02:44 PM

At 's invitation I had a tryout of F & E's new tool. purposely did not talk to me about it so he could not influence me prior to my tests and the tool was unhandled.

Using redgum blanks I first roughed a blank to round, then cut V shapes and rolled beads. The roughed down finish was not as smooth as my roughing gouge produces but acceptable. The V cuts were not as deep as with the skew and the beads were not as smooth as with a skew. Because of the shape I could not roll very acute beads.

I had some dig ins with the tool and because of the shaft shape it had a tendency to twist over and dig in on the side to side cutting movement. This is because the acute trapezoidal shape means the side edges are not supported directly by the tool rest.

I then used it to hollow out an edge grain box. Again I had to fight the tendency to twist on the side way movements and had quite a bit of chatter. Inside side finish was acceptable but would require a fair bit of sanding.

I then repeated the same tests using my Bedan tool holding it the same way.

On each test the finish was smoother and easier to use. With the Bedan the side cutting edge is more acute which means that the side cutting edge is still sufficiently supported by the tool rest so that instead of fighting to keep the tool level all I had to do was guide it.

Upon reflection I feel that as a beginner's tool the Bedan would be better as it is easier to use and gives a smoother surface (and can be sharpened) whilst learning to use the skew.

Peter.

**RETIRED** · 7th October 2010, 05:03 PM

As I said previously, my opinions after nearly 3 days of testing.

**Frank&Earnest** · 7th October 2010, 07:25 PM

Thanks , I really appreciate the time you have put into this.

There is one substantial difference in the way we use the tool that could partially explain some different results: as shown by my picture above, I put the tool rest much higher, which results in a cutting presentation, while your toolrest is about centre high, which means that you either scrape or lower the handle to an impractical (at least for me) position to achieve a cutting presentation.

The different presentation also overcomes in part the issue of the base being smaller than the width of the blade, because in a cutting presentation with minimum clearance the whole width of the bevel is supported by the timber. (IIRC you made that point about the skew).

What I can not understand is why, by presenting the tool the same way I do for hollowing and shaping a bowl , at least for what can be seen in the picture, you get catches and "fight all the time" with the tool while, unless I am unknowingly extremely tolerant of it, I do not have that problem at all.

**brendan stemp** · 9th October 2010, 10:08 AM

Peter and , apologies if this is a dumb question but did you put a handle on the tool? I ask because I tried to use it without a handle when I first got it and had all sorts of problems but all was rectified when I put a handle on it. I also shortened the shaft considerably (by about 150mm)

**RETIRED** · 9th October 2010, 10:56 AM

No. I try all new tools unhandled (if they are long enough) so that I am sure the tool is doing the work and not being forced.

**tea lady** · 9th October 2010, 01:57 PM

Had a try with "the tool" the other day also. It wants to twist in your hand all the time, so you have to keep a grip on the thing. Maybe a handle would help that a little, but it shouldn;t have too.

With bevel rubbing in a "bedan" kinda way, or as a scraper. If the side of the tool touched anything it flipped over. Beads could only be shallow. It just never felt comfortable or relaxing to use. Beginners might think this is OK, cos perhaps no tool is yet relaxing to use.

It doesn't seem to have a sweet spot as "traditional tools" have, where you have things balanced just right and it sounds right and it just glides across the work making beautiful shavings.

I know you have put a lot of effort into this tool Frank and it does look well make, but ya can't make a tool work by saying it works.

I tried it many differant ways but I wouldn't tell a beginner to get one. Let alone anyone else.

Sorry Frank!

**Frank&Earnest** · 9th October 2010, 05:04 PM

Thanks guys. The picture is getting clearer.

- Not using a handle. Did you try the tool with one eye closed? You do not need two to see it. Cynical little me could think that you are looking for any excuse to come up with results that support a prejudice ...

Given that twisting is a potential weakness because of its design, would you not agree that a proper handle goes a long way towards counteracting it? That "it should not have to be so" means little when you are knowingly counteracting a weakness. We should not have to change government every few years, should we?

- Beginners could think it's OK because they do not know any better. Yep, I agree. I have said before that the level of expectations can be a relevant factor.

- Saying it works does not make it work. Yes, this is true. The point is that I do not say it works, I made it work. The problem we all have here is that one can not prove a negative. Even if the best turner in the world comes up and says that it does not work, there is always the possibility that it actually does in some circumstances. You have all seen the pictures of what I produced with it, from the finial to the walking stick, from the bowl to the undercut vessel. Do you honestly think that I lied?

What I can say , and you may choose to believe me or not, is that in two years of fiddling with it I have never, repeat never, had a horrific catch like the one has shown. I did always go slow and use a handle, though.

All this said, has been fair: he says that the tool is slower and less effective than the half a dozen tools it can replace, which we already knew, but does not deny that it can actually do what they do. Which is what I have always claimed: if I am Robinson Crusoe and I am building a pole lathe having ony one cutting tool and no grinder, that's the tool I want to have.

The question of effectiveness in hollowing the end grain puzzled me, so I tried this vase/big goblet (I have not thinned out the stem yet, will see). Once drilled the pilot hole to the desired depth, I hollowed the inside with the insert tool. I do not think I could have done it any better or faster with any of the other tools I have ( beginner's expectations, TL

) and, for a purportedly unstable and vibrating tool, I humbly submit that the chatter cutting with 160mm overhang was quite acceptable. The wood is dry cherry. Will experiment with other tools to see if any improves the finish of the roughed out internal wall.

**Sturdee** · 9th October 2010, 07:06 PM

Originally Posted by Frank&Earnest

- Not using a handle. Did you try the tool with one eye closed? You do not need two to see it. Cynical little me could think that you are looking for any excuse to come up with results that support a prejudice ...

Given that twisting is a potential weakness because of its design, would you not agree that a proper handle goes a long way towards counteracting it?

Actually I have read all the posts, seen all the photos and I have always approached this subject with an open mind. I wanted to prove that it was the greatest thing since sliced bread.

When , because of my interest and since I am still a beginner - only having taking it up less than a year ago, gave me the opportunity to try the tool he made a point of not discussing it with me, gave it to me and a lathe.

Yes, the tool was unhandled but it was not my tool. With the tool shortened a bit and handled it would probably handle better but the centre of the side cutting tip is still not directly supported by the toolrest and more effort would need to be made in controlling it rather than the Bedan that I regularly use.

Peter.

**RETIRED** · 9th October 2010, 08:47 PM

If anyone else wishes to try this tool, PM me and I will mail it to you.

**Frank&Earnest** · 9th October 2010, 09:50 PM

Originally Posted by Sturdee

Actually I have read all the posts, seen all the photos and I have always approached this subject with an open mind. I wanted to prove that it was the greatest thing since sliced bread.

When , because of my interest and since I am still a beginner - only having taking it up less than a year ago, gave me the opportunity to try the tool he made a point of not discussing it with me, gave it to me and a lathe.

Yes, the tool was unhandled but it was not my tool. With the tool shortened a bit and handled it would probably handle better but the centre of the side cutting tip is still not directly supported by the toolrest and more effort would need to be made in controlling it rather than the Bedan that I regularly use.

Peter.

Thanks, Peter, sorry for not acknowledging directly your contribution earlier (one would have been enough, though

). I am sure that you have been looking at it objectively and I accept the fact that, because the base is narrower than the width of the cutting edge, allowance has to be made for the inherent reduction of stability.

Here is where practice is important. Probably because of the long period of adjustment, I am unconsciously compensating for it, adjusting the height of the toolrest, as mentioned before, and changing the presentation to suit. For example, a side rake of 10 - 15 degrees is sufficient for the cutting edge to fall within the width of the base and therefore be fully supported by the toolrest.

Given that you are an expert of the bedan, you know that it has to be used with the toolrest up and pushed before rolling, a different technique than that of the skew. I am not sure that one can be considered a training ground for the other.

To test the limits of the tool it is necessary to highlight the consequences of excess, for which I am grateful. My hope is that a beginner, proceeding slowly in this discovery, would avoid them like I did.

**Frank&Earnest** · 9th October 2010, 09:59 PM

Originally Posted by

If anyone else wishes to try this tool, PM me and I will mail it to you.

Thanks , you are a gentleman.

The first batch is all gone, will be a couple of weeks before I get more.

**brendan stemp** · 9th October 2010, 11:25 PM

I can't believe you guys are prepared to condemn this tool after trying it unhandled. Very unfair. It is quite a different proposition with a handle on it and I can't see that this a design fault. I would recommend it to beginners if it had a handle on it. I wouldn't if Frank was suggesting to use it unhandled. In fact I can think of a number of tools (traditional included) I would be very reluctant to use without handles. I had the catches with this tool when it was unhandled but didn't when it was handled. The fact the cutting edge is unsupported is overcome very adequately with a handle.

Thread: Road test of the FETool.

Thread Tools

Search Thread

Similar Threads

Road test of the FETool.

Ci! Rougher road test on spindles.

One for the road

Road Test of Uni Jig.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions