Official Luthiers Forum!
http://w-ww.luthiersforum.com/forum/

Fleishman vs tower binding jig
http://w-ww.luthiersforum.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10101&t=55900		 Page 1 of 2
Author:  banjopicks [ Thu Sep 14, 2023 8:12 am ]
Post subject:  Fleishman vs tower binding jig
I probably didn't spell that right, sorry Mr. Fl#@^@#&$n. I know John Hall prefers the F over the T. I'm going to buy one or the other before I route my body. The F is a lot more expensive so I'd rather not go there unless there's a huge benefit to using it. Let's talk.
Author:  dofthesea [ Thu Sep 14, 2023 8:36 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Fleshman vs tower binding jig
I'd go with John Hall's version. The tower is a great way to go.
Author:  banjopicks [ Thu Sep 14, 2023 9:05 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Fleshman vs tower binding jig
I like that the tower takes up less space, in use and in storage.
Author:  bcombs510 [ Thu Sep 14, 2023 9:31 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Fleshman vs tower binding jig
If you go with a tower version (I use the LMI one), there are some things you can do to improve the results.

1) Route the channel .005 deeper than the binding and then bring the sides down to the binding, not the other way around. This helps to overcome the shallower channel that happens in the upper bout of the back due to the radius and taper. The bearings are often in .010 increments so account for that in your binding thickness (ex: make the binding .075 instead of .070) or use tape on the bearing to adjust the depth of cut. I try to do the former if possible.

2) Make sure to level the body in the carrier. Most all of the carriers have some type of vertical adjustment on the stanchions. Take your time and make sure all 4 corners are the same height off the benchtop. This seems to help a little with the upper bout issue on the back to lessen the need to bring the height of the binding down to the surface of the back. I find there is always a little there no matter what I do but good height adjustment of the carrier seems to minimize it.

3) Not specific to tower, but just check often when scraping back to keep a uniform thickness. The slight changes in height at the upper bout of the back aren’t as noticeable, but variations in thickness is immediately noticeable.

Hope some of that helps if you go the tower way.

I lust after the Allied Lutherie jig but there is zero chance I can ever justify the cost. :)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
Author:  kfish [ Thu Sep 14, 2023 3:39 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Fleishman vs tower binding jig
I made one of each. Neither is that complicated to build with a little hardware and leftover plywood. I used a drawer slides and a couple springs. I bought a donut from Elevate to use on my F, but I have one I got from John Hall I used in the tower. I use the same cradle for both. I used the tower for years and never really had a problem but I always hated moving the bulky cradle to keep the body against the cutter. I like the idea of having the router in my hand so I built a Fleishman style unit. It's ok. It is huge so it's a hassle to move and store but it works fine. Though I like having the router in my hand and I feel closer to the cut, my results aren't any different.
So there is my inconclusive opinion.
Kent
Author:  meddlingfool [ Thu Sep 14, 2023 4:27 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Fleishman vs tower binding jig
I use a tower style, from back alley drawer slides and scrap plywood.

One router permanently set to depth for routing excess, main channel, top purfling, and back purfling. Easy to just change rollers if you want to change thickness of the cut.

Drop the box in the cradle and make your cuts, flip and make your cuts.

Probably one of the greatest timesavers from having to test cut each cut, then change, test etc. Just mounted a parallel guide that cam with the router to the tower and the routers slip in and out, and the others are used as holders.

I made little ramps rather than a donut, with the high points as close to to the cutter as you can, this helps minimize depth change an the back.

Image
Image
Image
Author:  meddlingfool [ Thu Sep 14, 2023 4:31 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Fleishman vs tower binding jig
Though if space is your prime concern, you can’t beat the Elevate system…
Author:  banjopicks [ Fri Sep 15, 2023 7:37 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Fleishman vs tower binding jig
meddlingfool wrote:
I use a tower style, from back alley drawer slides and scrap plywood.

One router permanently set to depth for routing excess, main channel, top purfling, and back purfling. Easy to just change rollers if you want to change thickness of the cut.

Drop the box in the cradle and make your cuts, flip and make your cuts.

Probably one of the greatest timesavers from having to test cut each cut, then change, test etc. Just mounted a parallel guide that cam with the router to the tower and the routers slip in and out, and the others are used as holders.

I made little ramps rather than a donut, with the high points as close to to the cutter as you can, this helps minimize depth change an the back.

Image
Image
Image


That's quite the system. You don't waste any time with that!
Author:  Kbore [ Fri Sep 15, 2023 9:22 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Fleishman vs tower binding jig
meddlingfool wrote:
I use a tower style, from back alley drawer slides and scrap plywood.

One router permanently set to depth for routing excess, main channel, top purfling, and back purfling. Easy to just change rollers if you want to change thickness of the cut.

Drop the box in the cradle and make your cuts, flip and make your cuts.

Probably one of the greatest timesavers from having to test cut each cut, then change, test etc. Just mounted a parallel guide that cam with the router to the tower and the routers slip in and out, and the others are used as holders.

I made little ramps rather than a donut, with the high points as close to to the cutter as you can, this helps minimize depth change an the back.

Image
Image
Image


Love that whole setup.
Author:  bcombs510 [ Fri Sep 15, 2023 10:26 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Fleishman vs tower binding jig
Yeah, that wall of trimmers warms my heart. :D


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
Author:  meddlingfool [ Fri Sep 15, 2023 11:56 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Fleishman vs tower binding jig
Thank you! I’m quite fond of it. It is indeed a major timesaver.

There’s the initial expense of buying four routers and four cutting bits, but, since each bit only does one cut, they last a long time. I can’t remember the last time I had to replace a cutter. I should probably look into that…

OH SH*T! They came from LMI….
Author:  banjopicks [ Sat Sep 16, 2023 5:39 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Fleishman vs tower binding jig
I'm also considering the Elevate jig. This is what I saw them use at the Martin factory. No cradle required so storage is real easy.
Author:  joshnothing [ Sat Sep 16, 2023 7:22 am ]
Post subject:  Fleishman vs tower binding jig
banjopicks wrote:
I'm also considering the Elevate jig. This is what I saw them use at the Martin factory. No cradle required so storage is real easy.

I have the elevate jig and it’s great. You just need one elevate jig for the binding, one for top purfs, one for back purfs…


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Author:  banjopicks [ Sat Sep 16, 2023 8:56 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Fleishman vs tower binding jig
Ah no. Just one jig for me.
Author:  Dave m2 [ Sat Sep 16, 2023 11:10 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Fleishman vs tower binding jig
An advantage of the tower plus cradle system is that you can use the cradle to clamp the box to the work bench while installing bindings and purflings.

Dave
Author:  Pmaj7 [ Sat Sep 16, 2023 6:30 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Fleishman vs tower binding jig
Yes, the cradle works good for holding the box while binding/scraping etc. Tower or Fleish

Pat
Author:  banjopicks [ Mon Sep 18, 2023 5:44 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Fleishman vs tower binding jig
I'm considering building the Fleishman now. I like the idea of holding router instead of moving the body. I'd pay for a set of plans but I can't find any.
Author:  banjopicks [ Wed Sep 27, 2023 7:53 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Fleishman vs tower binding jig
So, anyone that has the Fleishman version, can you give me some dimensions please. I want to build this before I go any further. Drawer slide length, type/preference? Size of the arm and box, that's about all I need.
Author:  Colin North [ Wed Sep 27, 2023 11:22 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Fleishman vs tower binding jig
banjopicks wrote:
So, anyone that has the Fleishman version, can you give me some dimensions please. I want to build this before I go any further. Drawer slide length, type/preference? Size of the arm and box, that's about all I need.

Is this the kind of jig plans you're looking for?
http://www.luthierscooltools.com/Dwgs.htm#Binding%20Jig
Author:  banjopicks [ Wed Sep 27, 2023 11:36 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Fleishman vs tower binding jig
Thank you Collin. That's it and I just ordered the plans.
Author:  Casey Cochran [ Thu Oct 12, 2023 8:47 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Fleishman vs tower binding jig
+1 for the Fleishman. I like the articulation and that it puts the tool in my right hand.
Author:  bcombs510 [ Tue Nov 14, 2023 10:36 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Fleishman vs tower binding jig
meddlingfool wrote:
There’s the initial expense of buying four routers and four cutting bits, but, since each bit only does one cut, they last a long time. I can’t remember the last time I had to replace a cutter. I should probably look into that…

OH SH*T! They came from LMI….


Our friend Andy to the rescue! https://birkonium.com/shop/tools-misc/b ... cca0298e18

Stocking stuffer! :)
Author:  meddlingfool [ Tue Nov 14, 2023 1:12 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Fleishman vs tower binding jig
Terrific news! Please remember when I forget, lol…
Author:  banjopicks [ Tue Aug 20, 2024 8:24 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Fleishman vs tower binding jig
Well as you all know, I like to change my mind mid stride. After buying the plans for the Fleishman jig and building the levelers, I decided that the rest of it was more work than I cared to do. I bought the Elmer tower jig. I just started assembling it this morning and I found something I didn't personally like about it.

Here's my review.
I would give this 5 stars if it came with top adjustment knobs for the guitar levelers. I haven't finished assembling it yet but was surprised by the underside adjustment. I suppose for a lot of us it's a one time adjustment but I still would rather have top adjustment knobs and T-nuts under the board. Not a big deal as I can pick those up at the hardware store or order online for little money.

That said, I think it's going to work great and I'm glad I purchased it.
Author:  Woodie G [ Wed Aug 21, 2024 5:22 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Fleishman vs tower binding jig
Either type of jig will produce an undercut on the upper bout due to the shoe design and distance from the support surface to cutter. That undercut in depth can be addressed with deepening the cut in that area or using a wheel-style marking gauge to clean up the joint. We used a Lie-Nielsen marking gauge, but the Lee Valley/Veritas works nearly as well. The procedure was to set the wheel depth at the deepest part of the channel after routing, then work that around the body. Keep in mind that the further the cutter is from the highest point of the back or top while mounted in the carriage, the greater the error in depth, so it is worth doing cleanup with cutting gauge or similar if you wish to have consistent-depth channels on both back and top. It was not unusual to see these sorts of deviations on binding depth on small shop-produced guitars coming into the shop for remediation of design or build issues.

IIRC, Mr. Don Williams - a current member here - used to have plans for the jig on one of his sites, but I can no longer find them. If memory serves, all of the Greenridge articulating arm jigs were built to the design. With Mr. Fleishman's passing in July of this year, I would hope that those selling plans for the jig will at least mention his roll as well as Mr. William's improvements re: design and development of this jig.
Page 1 of 2 All times are UTC - 5 hours
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/