Stewart system??
Scott Koppa
I'm thinking about getting a Stewart System Slicer to cone out bowl
blanks, so I'm looking for inputs from people with experience with it.
Is it worth it to get the armbrace handle?
Do the curved tools from other manufacturers actually work any better?
About how wide of a gap do you have to make to get to the bottom of a 4
to 5 inch-thick bowl?
Any and all comments are welcome.
John McGaw
Scott,
I have the slicer and have used it just a bit. My biggest problem with it
is that it seems so wasteful of wood. The cones that are cut out of even
fairly large bowls are very limiting of the shapes that can be turned from
them. The slot that needs to be cut can become quite wide to provide
clearance as the tool increases in width quite dramatically up toward the
handle. Even for more shallow cuts you need a slot two or three times as
wide as the blade.
Some famous turners, Richard Raffan for example, swear by the slicer and
use it all the time. As an aside, RR uses it backwards from most everybody
else, cutting in from the headstock end and popping bowls off the other;
when he describes it, the method makes great sense and i'm looking forward
to trying it that way.
As for the handle. Yes, if you try to use the slicer with some lesser form
of support you are just courting disaster. The slicer requires massive
effort to keep under control.
As for the "curved system" you must be talking about the McNaughton System.
I haven't used it personally but it looks really slick. For one thing the
control problem is pretty well beaten by that slick guide that fits the
tool holder socket. The curved profiles it cuts look to be a major
advantage in the saving of wood. I was in Provo when Richard Raffan saw the
tool demonstrated for the first time by MIke Mahoney. Even this stalwart
support of the Stewart slicer seemed genuinely impressed although he
lamented the fact that his "backward" approach to coring wouldn't work with
it. Maybe someday I'll be able to borrow one of these long enough to try it
out before deciding about buying one for myself.
John McGaw
Knoxville, TN
Scott Koppa <Scott...@PSS.Boeing.com> wrote in article
<3533E6...@PSS.Boeing.com>...
Fred Holder
I saw the McNaughton System demonstrated shortly after it became available in
the United States. It did a very nice job; however, it seemed to take a very
powerful lathe to really do its job well. My lathe has a 3/4 HP motor and I
didn't think it would work for me.
However, in Provo last summer, I saw the Bowl Saver demonstrated and it looked
promising. Then in San Antonio, Craft Supplies USA had a demo of the Bowl Saver
going on all day long just across the isle from my table. I finally bought one
on Saturday. It works fine with my 3/4 HP lathe. The Bowl Saver is probably even
more controlled than the McNaughton System, using both the toolrest and the
tailstock to hold it solid.
Fred Holder
<http://www.skagit.com/woodturning>
In article <01bd6b25$25df6000$6edd...@jmcgaw.usit.net>, "John says...
Steve
Scott,
I use the Stewart system for hollowing, but not the slicer. I looked
into it and a few others, but settled on the McNaughton Bowl Saver. The
Stewart slicer is very limited and hogs out lots of wood for the
clearance of the cutter. It offers limited core choices as well.
I use the McNaughton frequently and find it an excellent investment. I'm
a production turner however, and this may not hold true for an
occasional turner (re: investment vs. return on investment). Bowls saved
instead of chips, has a very strong appeal mate!
The McNaughton has four different blades with a straight one that can
operate like the Stewart slicer, but with a much smaller kerf. The
McNaughton blades are flat (with curved profiles) with a rounded top and
bottom. The cutter on the end is wider than the blade to help with
clearance of the chips. I have found however, that you still need to
increase the kerf at times, on some bad boy timbers. I can consistantly
get three good bowls from a 4" blank. The mfg. claims one bowl saved for
every 1-1.25" of blank so I guess I'm right in there. Getting that
fourth bowl out of a 4" blank is a real challenge though.
You get many options with the McNaughton vs. the Stewart slicer. To a
production turner, this translates to dollars in your pocket. You do
need a good lathe and some HP behind you. I have a 1.5HP on a Woodfast
and find it adequate. I would not use less than a 1HP for the
McNaughton. My new Oneway 2436 will have a 3HP motor and I can't wait to
give it a go :-).
If you do not need the large capacity of the McNaughton, look into the
Woodcut bowl saver. It will work on smaller lathes with smaller motors.
It is however, limited to simple rounded bowl cores for the most part.
If you want flexability and maximum design choices, go for the
McNaughton mate!
Letting the chips fly...
Steve
Eurowood Werks
Howard Klepper
I am getting good results with the McNaughten system (large size) using
a Nova 3000 with 1hp.
Fred Holder
By fine, I mean that it cuts well without overloading my motor. I'm not
sure what you mean by "how often can it be used?" I haven't used mine enough to
hurt it I watched a fellow at San Antonio use it all the time for three days
with no problem. He simply took bowl blanks and turned them into a bunch of bowl
blanks. You are limited in the shape and you are with any of these systems. If I
remember right, the Bowl Saver is limited to about 12", but that is the limit of
my lathe so it is fine for me.
Hope this helps.
Fred Holder
<http://www.skagit.com/woodturning>
In article <353A6B17...@bigfoot.com>, Cliff says...
>
>Fred,
>You say it works fine. Will you give us an example of what fine is? How often
>can it be used. Are their limitations to the size(s) etc.
> Thanks,
>Cliff
Cliff Leonard
Neil Lithgow
Scott Koppa wrote:
>
> I'm thinking about getting a Stewart System Slicer to cone out bowl
Scott,
I can't help with the Stewart system but I recently purchased a Woodcut
"Bowlsaver". I had looked at other designs and as far as I could see
this was the best designed tool. The "Steelite" cutting tips are great
and although very hard, grind easily. I hit one of the retaining screws
in the faceplate and because both faces are hollow ground, it was a
piece of cake to touch up the cutting surface.
I am convinced that the Woodcut tool is the safest for the operator of
all the tools I've looked at. Should a large blank come loose it can't
go anywhere because the Bowlcutter is right up to the log and is firmly
fixed in place by both the tool rest and the tailstock.
I had no trouble producing 90 bowl blaanks last Saturday morning using
this system. They ranged in size from 13" down to 6".
Regards,
Neil Lithgow
Auckland. New Zealand