Skew ChiDAMN!!
4th September 2019, 02:47 PM
So, after NeilS imported his D-Way bowl gouge, I was surprised to receive a PM asking if I'd like to take it for a test run.
Needless to say, I jumped at the chance. So I owe many, many thanks to Neil for giving me this opportunity to tortu^H^H^H test the D-Way. You silly, silly man. ;)
Now, during testing I didn't take any measurements or timings, nor did I bother taking any photos. This was purely subjective; my impressions of how it actually performed as compared to other similar bowl gouges. (We've all seen specs of equipment that look absolutely fabulous, but in use are like herding cats, haven't we?)
For this test, I chose a lump of Ironbark from my firewood pile, a largish old Redgum burl, a lightning-struck piece of Mulga stump and a 4x4 chunk of Radiata post, courtesy of Bunnings. Y'know... all the "traditional" Aussie hardwoods. Hehe.
I should also mention that these aren't pieces lovingly selected from some Timber Boutique in downtown Yuppiesville. No, these are pieces that have been dragged in from the wilds and haven't been broken to the saddle yet, let alone house broken.
The Redgum burl even had the chutzpah to mark it's spot with a li'l pile of sandy grit. :doh:
To give me something to compare it to, I broke out my Doug Thompson 1/2" v-flute, (I wish I had a U-flute for a more accurate comparison, but I don't.) a 1/2" P&N U-flute (my daily workhorse) and just for giggles, the Doug Thompson 3/8" v-flute Kryo I use for finishing cuts.
The D-Way itself is a very nice piece of machining, 1/2" with a nice, crisp, faultless U-flute (the best I've seen out of the box) and a small secondary bevel on the heel of the primary. It arrived in the post un-handled and, as it's not mine to modify, I went looking for my interchangeable handles. This took me a while, as I generally only use these for goose-necks when deep hollowing, which isn't really my thing. Having found both my 3/8" and 5/8" handles, but not the faintest hint of the hiding place of the 1/2", I decided that rather than muck about with a bad fit I'd use one of Hughie's Rip-Snorter Jr (I think) Oland tools which takes 3/8" sq HSS stock.
A nice fit, but in effect it made the handle much longer & weightier than any of the tools I was comparing it to, all of which had dedicated handles customised for me. Naturally, I believe this is reflected in the results to a small degree.
Before I started, I set up my grinding jig to reflect the D-Way's angles and reground my 1/2" gouges to match to reduce variables for comparison. (But not the Kryo... I like that just the way it is and have no intention of changing it.) Now, I know the DT is a V-flute so the result has a different shape on the wings, but the P&N is a U-flute which still came out slightly differently; it has a different U profile. Still, the tips are the same and I intended to do most of the cutting on the tips.
If any-ones curious as to what those angles actually are... sorry. I'll guess at 55 deg for the primary; I simply copy-pasta'd the angles over using the jig.
My sharpening setup is quite simple. A 6" AlOx (white) wheel and a Teknatool jig. Each trip to the grinder took more time to set the tool correctly in the jig than was spent actual sharpening; which was just a matter of a single pass or so to 'freshen' the edge. When using good tools I tend to sharpen lightly but often. (Except with the P&N but... well... we all have bad habits. I did try to apply the same sharpening regime to it, but habits are called habits for good reason. :rolleyes:)
The secondary bevel is interesting, it's not something I've played with before. Certainly makes bottom feeding more easy, but I found it reduced the safe range of "angle of attack" for most other cuts. Perhaps I rely more on feedback from bevel pressure than I thought. This is my shortcoming, not a reflection on the D-Way. I found it to be true of all the tools I reground with the secondary bevel.
It only took a few minutes for me to adjust, but I think that when it comes time to regrind to original angles the P&N is going to lose it. Methinks I'll keep it on the Thompson, as I use that almost solely for finishing cuts anyway, so I'm rarely aggressive with it and the bevel does make finishing bottoms easier. :think:
The actual turning was pretty much just me mounting a lump, then starting to rough, alternating between each tool for about a minute, until it needed sharpening or I decided the blank was unsafe without further treatment, whichever came first. I used each tool roughly (no pun intended. Honest!) 5 times, before switching modes and doing some hollowing. Similar tool usage, but hollowing a roughly 6"dia x 3"deep bowl in the end. On each surface (bowl and exterior) I did a finishing pass with the Kryo to give me a baseline of a good off-the-tool finish for each piece of timber. Which was pretty much the only times I used the Kryo. :-
Then I'd dismount and move onto the next lump of wood. The whole process has left me with some interestingly shaped blanks! The Redgum burl and piece of Ironbark will need some stabilising before I continue with them, but they'll both make interesting pieces if/when finished.
Results?
Well... I'm not going to bother covering how each timber cuts differently. You only need to spin them up for yourself to find that out.
In use I found that the D-Way is pretty much the same as the 1/2" Thompson. I didn't see any real difference between the ease of use or resharpening times. (And with these timbers there were quite a few trips to the grinder! :( ) I believe that I sharpened the Thompson a tad more often than the D-Way but only by a trip or two. Considering that I didn't time the cut durations or measure volume removed I'd say that within a given margin of error they hold their edges about the same.
I did notice that at first the D-Way was giving me a nicely burnished finish which puzzled me as the other tools weren't, even though they had the same cutting angles at the tip. This is where I suspect that the overly long/heavy handle made a difference, probably pulling my cuts off a degree or so from where I thought they were and, in effect, heavily rubbing the bevel. I'm probably going to look into doing that deliberately in future, for pieces where I want that look off the tool!
The P&N, surprisingly, only went to the grinder a bit more often and actually hogged out a wee tad faster. This is one of the reasons this isn't an empirical test... one variable I can't reduce is ME. With tools I care about, I tend to cut 'properly and safely.' The P&N is my day-to-day workhorse though and I tend to be very aggressive with it; it's job is removing bulk material when I don't really care about the finish. So I allow it to stay blunt for longer and often put a bit of elbow grease into using it.
(For any beginners, this is NOT recommended! It's much safer to let the tool cut at it's own rate. Not only does forcing the tool overheat the edge, leading to more frequent sharpening, but in the case of embedded objects it can mean the difference between chipping the edge and losing an inch or two of steel... or breaking the tool-rest! DAMHIKT. Now that P&N's aren't as readily or cheaply available, perhaps I should reconsider using it this way?)
If the above few paragraphs don't make sense, let's just say that I whaled on the P&N while I used the others correctly, which skews the findings quite a bit. I did try NOT to, honestly, but the moment I pick up the P&N the ol' muscle learning kicks in and the monster is loosed. It's all in my head, I know, but if you think that's a simple fix, I got bad news for ya. ;)
The DT & D-Way gouges matched the finish fairly easily, which is a good thing. The P&N failed, sorta. After a fresh sharpen it'd start off nicely, but I couldn't manage more than one or two finishing cuts before it degraded the cut and needed resharpening. Nothing unexpected there in any way, given the timbers I was abusing.
Conclusion:
Will I buy one? No. I don't need it, I have the Thompson which is pretty much it's equal. Do I want one? Hell, yes. Every turner should have at least one tool of this calibre, for finishing cuts at least.
If I was living in the States so I didn't have to pay import duties and shipping, I could easily see this becoming my workhorse instead of the P&N. More expensive, true, but it lasts longer and - I'm guesstimating here - would work out about the same cost over the tool's lifetime. Mind you, I also say the same about the DT. Heh.
PS: Yoohoo! 1/2" handle? You listening? The trials are over, the nasty feral pieces are back in their boxes and you can come home now...
Needless to say, I jumped at the chance. So I owe many, many thanks to Neil for giving me this opportunity to tortu^H^H^H test the D-Way. You silly, silly man. ;)
Now, during testing I didn't take any measurements or timings, nor did I bother taking any photos. This was purely subjective; my impressions of how it actually performed as compared to other similar bowl gouges. (We've all seen specs of equipment that look absolutely fabulous, but in use are like herding cats, haven't we?)
For this test, I chose a lump of Ironbark from my firewood pile, a largish old Redgum burl, a lightning-struck piece of Mulga stump and a 4x4 chunk of Radiata post, courtesy of Bunnings. Y'know... all the "traditional" Aussie hardwoods. Hehe.
I should also mention that these aren't pieces lovingly selected from some Timber Boutique in downtown Yuppiesville. No, these are pieces that have been dragged in from the wilds and haven't been broken to the saddle yet, let alone house broken.
The Redgum burl even had the chutzpah to mark it's spot with a li'l pile of sandy grit. :doh:
To give me something to compare it to, I broke out my Doug Thompson 1/2" v-flute, (I wish I had a U-flute for a more accurate comparison, but I don't.) a 1/2" P&N U-flute (my daily workhorse) and just for giggles, the Doug Thompson 3/8" v-flute Kryo I use for finishing cuts.
The D-Way itself is a very nice piece of machining, 1/2" with a nice, crisp, faultless U-flute (the best I've seen out of the box) and a small secondary bevel on the heel of the primary. It arrived in the post un-handled and, as it's not mine to modify, I went looking for my interchangeable handles. This took me a while, as I generally only use these for goose-necks when deep hollowing, which isn't really my thing. Having found both my 3/8" and 5/8" handles, but not the faintest hint of the hiding place of the 1/2", I decided that rather than muck about with a bad fit I'd use one of Hughie's Rip-Snorter Jr (I think) Oland tools which takes 3/8" sq HSS stock.
A nice fit, but in effect it made the handle much longer & weightier than any of the tools I was comparing it to, all of which had dedicated handles customised for me. Naturally, I believe this is reflected in the results to a small degree.
Before I started, I set up my grinding jig to reflect the D-Way's angles and reground my 1/2" gouges to match to reduce variables for comparison. (But not the Kryo... I like that just the way it is and have no intention of changing it.) Now, I know the DT is a V-flute so the result has a different shape on the wings, but the P&N is a U-flute which still came out slightly differently; it has a different U profile. Still, the tips are the same and I intended to do most of the cutting on the tips.
If any-ones curious as to what those angles actually are... sorry. I'll guess at 55 deg for the primary; I simply copy-pasta'd the angles over using the jig.
My sharpening setup is quite simple. A 6" AlOx (white) wheel and a Teknatool jig. Each trip to the grinder took more time to set the tool correctly in the jig than was spent actual sharpening; which was just a matter of a single pass or so to 'freshen' the edge. When using good tools I tend to sharpen lightly but often. (Except with the P&N but... well... we all have bad habits. I did try to apply the same sharpening regime to it, but habits are called habits for good reason. :rolleyes:)
The secondary bevel is interesting, it's not something I've played with before. Certainly makes bottom feeding more easy, but I found it reduced the safe range of "angle of attack" for most other cuts. Perhaps I rely more on feedback from bevel pressure than I thought. This is my shortcoming, not a reflection on the D-Way. I found it to be true of all the tools I reground with the secondary bevel.
It only took a few minutes for me to adjust, but I think that when it comes time to regrind to original angles the P&N is going to lose it. Methinks I'll keep it on the Thompson, as I use that almost solely for finishing cuts anyway, so I'm rarely aggressive with it and the bevel does make finishing bottoms easier. :think:
The actual turning was pretty much just me mounting a lump, then starting to rough, alternating between each tool for about a minute, until it needed sharpening or I decided the blank was unsafe without further treatment, whichever came first. I used each tool roughly (no pun intended. Honest!) 5 times, before switching modes and doing some hollowing. Similar tool usage, but hollowing a roughly 6"dia x 3"deep bowl in the end. On each surface (bowl and exterior) I did a finishing pass with the Kryo to give me a baseline of a good off-the-tool finish for each piece of timber. Which was pretty much the only times I used the Kryo. :-
Then I'd dismount and move onto the next lump of wood. The whole process has left me with some interestingly shaped blanks! The Redgum burl and piece of Ironbark will need some stabilising before I continue with them, but they'll both make interesting pieces if/when finished.
Results?
Well... I'm not going to bother covering how each timber cuts differently. You only need to spin them up for yourself to find that out.
In use I found that the D-Way is pretty much the same as the 1/2" Thompson. I didn't see any real difference between the ease of use or resharpening times. (And with these timbers there were quite a few trips to the grinder! :( ) I believe that I sharpened the Thompson a tad more often than the D-Way but only by a trip or two. Considering that I didn't time the cut durations or measure volume removed I'd say that within a given margin of error they hold their edges about the same.
I did notice that at first the D-Way was giving me a nicely burnished finish which puzzled me as the other tools weren't, even though they had the same cutting angles at the tip. This is where I suspect that the overly long/heavy handle made a difference, probably pulling my cuts off a degree or so from where I thought they were and, in effect, heavily rubbing the bevel. I'm probably going to look into doing that deliberately in future, for pieces where I want that look off the tool!
The P&N, surprisingly, only went to the grinder a bit more often and actually hogged out a wee tad faster. This is one of the reasons this isn't an empirical test... one variable I can't reduce is ME. With tools I care about, I tend to cut 'properly and safely.' The P&N is my day-to-day workhorse though and I tend to be very aggressive with it; it's job is removing bulk material when I don't really care about the finish. So I allow it to stay blunt for longer and often put a bit of elbow grease into using it.
(For any beginners, this is NOT recommended! It's much safer to let the tool cut at it's own rate. Not only does forcing the tool overheat the edge, leading to more frequent sharpening, but in the case of embedded objects it can mean the difference between chipping the edge and losing an inch or two of steel... or breaking the tool-rest! DAMHIKT. Now that P&N's aren't as readily or cheaply available, perhaps I should reconsider using it this way?)
If the above few paragraphs don't make sense, let's just say that I whaled on the P&N while I used the others correctly, which skews the findings quite a bit. I did try NOT to, honestly, but the moment I pick up the P&N the ol' muscle learning kicks in and the monster is loosed. It's all in my head, I know, but if you think that's a simple fix, I got bad news for ya. ;)
The DT & D-Way gouges matched the finish fairly easily, which is a good thing. The P&N failed, sorta. After a fresh sharpen it'd start off nicely, but I couldn't manage more than one or two finishing cuts before it degraded the cut and needed resharpening. Nothing unexpected there in any way, given the timbers I was abusing.
Conclusion:
Will I buy one? No. I don't need it, I have the Thompson which is pretty much it's equal. Do I want one? Hell, yes. Every turner should have at least one tool of this calibre, for finishing cuts at least.
If I was living in the States so I didn't have to pay import duties and shipping, I could easily see this becoming my workhorse instead of the P&N. More expensive, true, but it lasts longer and - I'm guesstimating here - would work out about the same cost over the tool's lifetime. Mind you, I also say the same about the DT. Heh.
PS: Yoohoo! 1/2" handle? You listening? The trials are over, the nasty feral pieces are back in their boxes and you can come home now...