Thread: Triton MOF001 mount to table

Steve, that sounds like DPB's thread. Stuart, I've sent DPB an email, let's see what he has to say. What you say is a bit of a concern.

I got a PM reply from DPB saying he'd left the Router Raizer behind and gone onto a Unilift. He wasn't aware however that there was any particular problem with the Router Raizer.

Also got a PM from Rayintheuk, who argued strongly that lifters were cumbersome in the case of the Triton routers due to particularities in the Troton design, and that, like Stuart had argued, you have to get down to table height for height adjusting anyway, to sight across the bit, making the through-table winding pointless.

Nobody with a Unilift fitted to their Triton in a table, like DPB or Richard Vaughan whose project in Australan Wood Review 52 featured such a setup, has offered an opinion why that arrangement is their preferred. Perhaps it is suited to higher production throughput? But that's just my speculation. I can'y justify a Unilift anyway at the expense (c.AUD600) when obviously you can, at the least, get away without it or at the worst, it is redundant to the practical operation of a Triton router setup anyway.

That the MOF001 has through-table height adjustment appeared a desirable feature to me when I began the thread; however, it seems unwise on principle to go with its lower power -- and Ray and Stuart's comments are to the effect that I won't miss the winder anyway. So I'll be getting a TRA001 and mounting it onto a pre-drilled TLR phenolic router plate. Set.

Dunno about you'se but I dont need to sight the cutter height at table level, I use a height guage or a digi caliper instead.(DC measure after test cut)

The big deal about this router is that you can use a simple router plate yet still have easy access to bit and collet change. You do still have to reach under the table before, 1) to turn off the power switch (assuming you have an external switch for the router on your table) and 2) access the knob that brings the unit all the way up, conveniently in 180 degree twist, and after, reverse both steps.

This means that the rather expensive router-raiser type lifters are not needed. You can, instead, use a simpler (and much less expensive) plate to mount this router on your table.

I found a clever article that points out that since the router comes with an extended base (which is also the fence), you could easily use the base that comes with the router in your router table! A brilliantly simple idea. You would need to drill a hole for the winder crank, because oddly it is not predrilled.

Here are the details of this, along with photos about building a horizontal, vertical, and sliding router table: www.linssuv.com/router.htm

Originally Posted by MysticRiver

I found a clever article that points out that since the router comes with an extended base (which is also the fence), you could easily use the base that comes with the router in your router table! A brilliantly simple idea. You would need to drill a hole for the winder crank, because oddly it is not predrilled.

That sure is a brilliantly simple idea, aside from the very large hole in the plate that is not an issue with dedicated router plate inserts and rings. I wouldn't want to be routing delicate or short pieces with that setup, although the ingenuity for larger stock is undeniable.

Ray.

Originally Posted by Gunnaduit

I realise I like the smooth power of my 3HP Ryobi (which I'll keep for hand-held plunge work); maybe the 2.25 HP of the MOF001 will feel light after getting used to 3HP.

I suspect that this misdescription started in the US (where it is more prevalent) and has migrated from there but;

1HP = 746W = .746KW
The small Triton is rated at 1400W or about 1.85HP

So why do so many people refer to it as the 2 1/4HP Triton.

Now the big brother 2400W unit is close to 3 1/4HP (actually 3.2), so that almost fair game, but take away a full KW (1000W or 1.35HP) in moving to the smaller unit cannot result in 2 1/4 HP.

Originally Posted by rayintheuk

That sure is a brilliantly simple idea, aside from the very large hole in the plate that is not an issue with dedicated router plate inserts and rings. I wouldn't want to be routing delicate or short pieces with that setup, although the ingenuity for larger stock is undeniable..

It's a good point. I'm not experienced with router tables (I'm researching, plan to build one) but it never occurred to me that I would want to use small or delicate pieces with a router. For sure you would need a jig to hold small and delicate pieces, same as with a table saw. When using a moulding cutter on a table saw, I normally groove a larger piece then trim, and that is another alternative to a holding jig.

I have not bought the Triton yet (again, I'm in research mode) but I learned that the rings do not fit the standard plate - they only go in the auxiliary plate (which is part of the kit in US, but a separate accessory down under) - so that is not a solution.

Originally Posted by MysticRiver

I have not bought the Triton yet (again, I'm in research mode) but I learned that the rings do not fit the standard plate - they only go in the auxiliary plate (which is part of the kit in US, but a separate accessory down under) - so that is not a solution.

I wasn't referring to the template guides, but the reducing rings that come as standard with router insert plates, such as Rousseau and Woodpecker. Whatever size piece you're routing, it's important that it has support right up to the cutter - hence my concern about the large unsupported area within the extended baseplate as shown in the article you referred to.

Ray.

Originally Posted by malb

I suspect that this misdescription started in the US (where it is more prevalent) and has migrated from there but;

1HP = 746W = .746KW
The small Triton is rated at 1400W or about 1.85HP

So why do so many people refer to it as the 2 1/4HP Triton.

People refer to the MOF001 as 2 1/4 HP because that is how it is listed on most US distributors' Web sites (Amazon, woodcraft, woodworker, ...). Triton's site describes MOF001 as 1400W, but it is not clear to me whether this means the power consumed, or the power delivered. The US version is rated 120V * 13A = 1560W power consumed. Triton's site does not specify HP delivered or Amperes used, and does not indicate what 1400W means, beyond "motor". Note that the Triton site describes the 220V version, which could be a different motor, too.

I have no basis for this claim, but I suspect that the power delivered by this router is in the same ballpark as the power delivered by other routers that are called 2 1/4 HP, though I not be surprised if in measuring the actual power delivered by these routers you found a variation of +/- 15%.

Originally Posted by rayintheuk

Whatever size piece you're routing, it's important that it has support right up to the cutter - hence my concern about the large unsupported area within the extended baseplate as shown in the article you referred to.

Thanks for explaining, Ray. The *%#! Craftsman router I have been using for years has a much smaller hole, and I am new to both routers capable of large bits and tables, so I didn't know that it was important to support materials up to the cutter. I do know it is important for some wood and blades on table saws (hence the need for zero clearance inserts), and perhaps it is for the same reason (avoid tearing of material).

It sounds like I will need to get a base plate for my table with this router after all... though not the expensive router-raiser type.

What brand of base plate do people prefer with the Triton MOF001, and why?

Originally Posted by MysticRiver

What brand of base plate do people prefer with the Triton MOF001, and why?

This question will start quite a debate, I'd imagine! We've been through this before and my preference is for a genuine Rousseau phenolic plate (see here under "Router Accessories"). There are clones that are inferior but look very similar. Some say that the crowning in the Rousseau-style plates is to account for sag - it's not. It's designed in to ensure that the part of the plate at the cutter is the highest by a minute fraction - invisible to the naked eye - to ensure constant and repeatable cuts.

Some prefer a completely flat plate - often the same people that say the crowning is to counteract sag - forgetting that the force required to make a plate of those dimensions (and 10mm thickness) sag would probably be above the weight of 50 routers. However, if you do prefer a flat plate of alloy construction, Woodpecker is probably the most often recommended (see here), but be prepared to spend much more to get one.

Several plates have a series of concentric rings on their underside to help with positioning prior to drilling mounting holes. Some come pre-drilled for specific routers. Fitting a router to a blank plate is, however, extremely simple. Remove the router black baseplate, place it on the underside of the insert plate in the correct orientation, fix firmly with double-sided tape or other method and pilot through from the underside. Complete the drilling from above, countersinking or counter-boring as required. To affix the Triton routers to a third-party insert will require four ¼" UNC machine screws approx 20mm long, depending on type and countersink/counterbore configuration. These are not supplied with either router because they're designed to be a tool-less fit to Triton's own Router Table (RTA300). HTH.

Ray.