Jim,
Just a thought on using the machines dimples on the base (angle) bar. I think if you check the forume you will find that many do not use them at all. In my case I reversed the bar so the smooth side is facing me. I filed the screws used to tighten the slider flat on the ends. They tighten up and stay tight ( no bracket movement). In addition, doing this allows for fractional degree settings much more easily. I know that the angle adjuster on the new arms allows this sort of fine adjustment, but has its limitations as to the amount you can adjust. I use lots of different stones with widely varying thicknesses. Sometimes, trying to set the slider adjustment using an indent just does not give enough travel to allow me to adjust for the difference stones. Using the smooth side I can set a base setting that allows me to not have to move the main slider again, but still accomodate all of my stones using just the fine angle adjustment feature. I am just trying to point out that you do not have to be dependent on using the indents. In some cases, doing so can actually be a liability, rather than an advantage. Just flattening the screws and maybe putting a little purple locktite on the screws will give you plenty of security against the adjustment moving.

Phil

JimMitchell wrote:
[/quote]

Thanks Phil.

I really appreciate your input on this and I know exactly what you're talking about. That's a great idea to turn the bar around and file down the screws and I will definately try it out.

Thanks again,
Jim

[quote="PhilipPasteur" post=4839]Jim,
Just a thought on using the machines dimples on the base (angle) bar. I think if you check the forume you will find that many do not use them at all. In my case I reversed the bar so the smooth side is facing me. I filed the screws used to tighten the slider flat on the ends. They tighten up and stay tight ( no bracket movement). In addition, doing this allows for fractional degree settings much more easily. I know that the angle adjuster on the new arms allows this sort of fine adjustment, but has its limitations as to the amount you can adjust. I use lots of different stones with widely varying thicknesses. Sometimes, trying to set the slider adjustment using an indent just does not give enough travel to allow me to adjust for the difference stones. Using the smooth side I can set a base setting that allows me to not have to move the main slider again, but still accomodate all of my stones using just the fine angle adjustment feature. I am just trying to point out that you do not have to be dependent on using the indents. In some cases, doing so can actually be a liability, rather than an advantage. Just flattening the screws and maybe putting a little purple locktite on the screws will give you plenty of security against the adjustment moving.

Phil

[quote="JimMitchell" post=4825]

BTW Clay.

Edit. I went back and checked and noticed a couple of things. First the fine angle adjustment was not set to maximize the angle. The approximately 1 inch wide knife was set in the top depth holes.

I backed the fine adjustment out all of the way and set the knife in the lower holes. When I did that I got the revised numbers below (highlighted in color). Of course the device would be useles in this configuration because the slider bracket was not secure on the base rod and it would rock enough to cause almost a full degree of change in the edge angle.

I decided to check the maximum angle I can get with my present setup . This is the new arms and standard base bar.

I can get a max of about 29.35 + 0.9 degrees (the plus comes from the fact the slider rocks a bit when slid this far out) with the retaining screw about half off of the far end of the bar. I too went through the calibration procedure for the angle cube and verified it with a square.

There must be some difference between the bracket/sliders that are being provided with the new arms and the ones you are using.

I too will be up for one of the extended bars...

Phil

PhilipPasteur wrote:


Put me down too please Clay, happy to pay the freight to Aus.

I'll take a look at the measurements tomorrow with one of the newest sets of joints and post some photos.

This was bothering me as well. In a past life I worked for a German industrial machine manufacturer and still have a calibrated set of jigs we used during the setup of molders. To start with I lied my tilt cube on the set and after cleaning off any shavings it was accurate +- .03 deg between 10 and 45 degrees. The knives I used were a Kershaw 1596 Spec Bump and a Chive.
I cleaned and zeroed the meter between each measurement and choose a 25 degree standard to check my calibration in between as well. I jumped through these hoops so I could remove any doubt in my own mind about the Digital inclinometer aka The Tilt Box.

The shots are of the Spec bump in both the upper and lower setting with min and max angles recorded and the chive in just the upper to see a smaller blade.

If there is a longer arm I want one, if not I’ll make one. But the geometry of the base with the riser is more of an issue on the low side. I don’t see any way around hogging out some metal. Has anyone done this? And what shape did you end up with?

Spec Bump upper max 22.20 upper min 12.55
Spec Bump lower max 23.15 lower min 14.15

Chive max 23.95 min 18.15

Thanks for bringing this up guys! Now that I'm in the office and looking at the new iteration of the joints from the prototypes I've been using, I see the difference. I'm working fast and furiously today to get the new base rods designed and I'll get the drawings off to the machine shop today.

Thanks Clay!

wickededge wrote: