Thread: Dedicated jointers vs planer/thicknessers

There has been a lot of very useful advice offered here already and I agree with it all. I had a 200 jointer and a 15inch thicknesser, both upgraded to helical head. Late last year I had an opportunity to purchase a 400 wide under and over. I needed the depth of cut the the 15 inch thicky didn’t have. Spiral head, not helical. I sold the 15 inch thicky but kept my 200 jointer. The fence is far more accurate for edge jointing. I’m luck I have the room for two machines. I use the gig jointer on the combo sometimes but only for flattening stuff too big for the little fella. Bed length is everything if you are doing longer boards. I have a 500mm extension table on my small jointer which gives me 2175 of bed length. I regularly joint 2700 boards for gluing up kitchen bench tops.

get a helical head rather than a spiral. A spiral has the cutting edge parallel to the table, a helical head has the cutters on an angle so they cut in shear. Better finishes and less noise are the result.

The cutters can be sharpened. There is a mob in Qld who do them, Combined Saw and Knife.i used to get blades sharpened about 4 times a year. My first rotation of my helical head was 14 months and I’m doing a hell of a lot more work now than two years ago.

I’m having the electrics done one another thickness I have been rebuilding very soon. An SCM S50 from the 70’s. It has a helical head in it so I will be able to directly compare and contrast cut quality. I’ll probably keep that machine as well, cause I can.

cheers
B

Another option if you see something in the second hand market is a machine that has a Tersa cutter block.

Changing blades with a Tersa cutter block is ten minutes absolute max; from start to finish.

Is it as good as the new helical cutters? Probably not. I've never owned one but I'm sure that there are good reasons they are so popular.

That said, Tersa cutters are pretty darned good!

Has the OP considered putting all the money allocated for either two separate machines or a single combo machine towards the widest/best quality thicknesser one can get with the same money?
Because this is what I did. I am swapping a 150 mm jointer and a 300mm thicknesser for a single 500 mm (or 20") thicknesser. A thickneser together with a sled and some spacers can flatten a board just as well as any jointer. I do any edge jointing with a table saw. A single thicknesser saves space, and has none of the hassles of switching modes which is a real PITA. It is also much cheaper than a combo machine.

Originally Posted by justonething

Has the OP considered putting all the money allocated for either two separate machines or a single combo machine towards the widest/best quality thicknesser one can get with the same money?
Because this is what I did. I am swapping a 150 mm jointer and a 300mm thicknesser for a single 500 mm (or 20") thicknesser. A thickneser together with a sled and some spacers can flatten a board just as well as any jointer. I do any edge jointing with a table saw. A single thicknesser saves space, and has none of the hassles of switching modes which is a real PITA. It is also much cheaper than a combo machine.

Okay, I have been thinking about this post for a while.
Having committed to spending too much on a sliding table saw, I’m looking to spend less on jointing/planning and thicknessing.
I always thought it might be possible to do what the poster suggested.
The idea of getting one machine and being able to work on wider boards is appealing.
Now, I know there will be people who say using a thicknesser as suggested is a big no no, so let’s move beyond that.
I’m curious about the sled and spacers and how it all works. Does anybody have any thoughts - or better still, photos?
What would be the best material for a sled? How do you stop the board being cut from moving on the sled? Etc etc etc.

I used 16mm MDF as the based of my sled with a stop glued to one end. I also got some non-slip grip tape (sandpaper looking tape) and some builders plastic spacer. Apply the grip tape on the surface of the sled. You are basically ready to go. Orient the stop at the front of the sled and place your board on top of the sled and put spacers in gaps between the board and the sled. Feed the board on the sled through the thicknesser, taking just a little bit at a time. once you have created a flat top surface. You can use the thicknesser without the sled to get a parallel surface on the other face of the board. You have to decide on the optimal length of the sled. Too long, its unwieldy and too short it won't be useful. I use about 1200 to 1500 long board.

They DON’T do the same thing,at all. The jointer has a long bed so that you can run an uneven ( think rough sawn) peice of timber over it and the knives will effectively cut off the high points, with a few passes, the timber should be flat,and straight. Then, the stock is rotated 90 degrees and the same process is done, with the first planed side, pressing against the fence, giving you a straight and true face and an edge at 90 degrees to that face.

The thicknesser is for then planing the other face and edge to the desired finished sizes, using the jointed face and edge on the bottom table as a reference point.

They are certainly not the same machine,nor do they do the same job, one goes with the other, always jointer first, then thicknesser.

Originally Posted by riverbuilder

They DON’T do the same thing,at all. The jointer has a long bed so that you can run an uneven ( think rough sawn) peice of timber over it and the knives will effectively cut off the high points, with a few passes, the timber should be flat,and straight. Then, the stock is rotated 90 degrees and the same process is done, with the first planed side, pressing against the fence, giving you a straight and true face and an edge at 90 degrees to that face.

The thicknesser is for then planing the other face and edge to the desired finished sizes, using the jointed face and edge on the bottom table as a reference point.

They are certainly not the same machine,nor do they do the same job, one goes with the other, always jointer first, then thicknesser.

He's comparing separate machines to combos. They do the same thing, it's just a question of 2 vs 1

Riverbuilder, I'm not sure whether you were responding to the original post or a more recent one.
Justonething was not suggesting that a jointer and thicknesser are the same thing. He wrote that he had had some success with using a thicknesser to do the job of a jointer (and then a thicknesser) for treating the faces of timber - he deals with the edges on a table saw.
The sliding sled that the timber is initially laid on with wedges and sandpaper to stop it moving is used to deal with one face. The sled functions like the long bed of the jointer.
Once that first face has been dealt with, the sled is discarded and the board flipped over and the thicknesser used as it was intended.
I can imagine how it could be done. But I acknowledge that if space and budget were no barrier, the best solution would be two separate machines.
I just went looking and there are plenty of videos:
using a thicknesser as a jointer - Google Search
using a thicknesser as a jointer - Google Search

There seems to be some inaccurate advice in this thread. Unfortunately a planer and a thicknesses have a fundermental difference in the length of the bed. My semi industrial planer thicknesses has a planer bed over 2m long but the thicknesses bed is only around 700mm. This allows a board to be planned totally flat. Even with a sled it would be very difficult to get a long board truly flat using the short thicknesser bed because the sled will tend to bend and tilt. Thicknesses and planers do different things and are therefore built different

Originally Posted by ronboult

There seems to be some inaccurate advice in this thread. Unfortunately a planer and a thicknesses have a fundermental difference in the length of the bed. My semi industrial planer thicknesses has a planer bed over 2m long but the thicknesses bed is only around 700mm. This allows a board to be planned totally flat. Even with a sled it would be very difficult to get a long board truly flat using the short thicknesser bed because the sled will tend to bend and tilt. Thicknesses and planers do different things and are therefore built different

The differences between jointer/planers and thicknessers has been clearly articulated and I think everybody understands.
And as I wrote, if space and budget were not a problem, everyone would have two separate machines.
Buying a combination machine - jointer/planer and thicknesser - is one compromise.
A further compromise is devising a method where the thicknesser can also perform the function of a jointer/planer.
A sled could be used, but in additon I don't think it would be difficult to build an extension to the bed of the thicknesser to address the issue you brought up.
I like the idea of using a thicknesser that way and being about to deal with boards up to 15 inches wide - far wider than could be accomodated on affordable jointer/planers or combination machines.

Wow! Talk about synchronicity! Here I am thinking of getting a new thicknesser and I revisit my old friend "Woodworkforms" just to find this thread straight off the bat!
I have an old Ryobi thicknesser that has served me well over the years but it is getting a bit rough. And it screams like a banshee! I'm not trying to highjack the thread. I don't need a joiner or planer. I make Adirondack chairs out of pallet wood. Hardly worth spending a fortune on a dedicated planer.
However...spending a grand on a new thicknesser is doable. I know this is like Holden vs Ford but Carbatec or Dewalt?

I live in a quiet seaside suburb in Adelaide. Turning on the Ryobi, which has noise levels approaching the threshold of pain, worries me. Surely the two afore mentioned thicknessers offer a better result and don't cause blood to eject from your ears, ear plugs or not!

Feel free to move my post or redirect it. But if a planer is a better way to go, please tell me.

Thanks,
Steve.

Someone with more knowledge than me will respond, but manufacturers indicate that spiral or helical heads operate more quietly. These are found on more expensive machines than your Ryobi.

I think the difference in bed lengths between a thicknesser and a planer is a red herring. Like scottbr said, one can make an extension table as long as the room if you want. The real shortcoming of such an idea is not in its feasibility; many people have done it, and it is the inconvenience:

1. It does not readily do edge jointing, you either have to do it using a table saw, but if the stock is too thick, it becomes very cumbersome to use shims to arrange a true 90° between 2 adjacent faces.
2. There is a lot of mucking around adjusting spacers and shims between each run and selecting the right length of sled. You probably won't want to use this method if you are not a hobbyist.

Otherwise, the method has been widely tried and documented.

Originally Posted by scottbr

Someone with more knowledge than me will respond, but manufacturers indicate that spiral or helical heads operate more quietly. These are found on more expensive machines than your Ryobi.

Helicals are definitely much quieter, but AFAIK all lunchbox type thicknessers, even the expensive ones, use brushed universal motors, which are inherently noisy.

Moving up to a free-standing machine with an induction motor will really save your ears, but they also cost significantly more.