Bowl coring system?

I briefly owned the McNasughton coring system, and found it hard to use -- it stalled my 1.5HP Nova often, and I couldn't control it easily.

But I've now realized that -- given the sort of wood I like to turn (burls and exotics) -- the amount I'm losing by not using a corer quickly adds up. So I'm reconsidering getting such a system.

Most of what I turn is pretty small -- bowls in the 9" x 9 x 4 down to e.g., small boxes from blackwood clarinet-bell rejects.

So... does anyone have experience with a corer system that will fairly easily let me save cores from pretty small pieces of wood?

Thanks,

Andy Barss

Reply to
Andrew Barss
Loading thread data ...

I would go back to the Mcnaughton. One thing that helps is to get the mahoney video and read Joe Flemings article.

The Hahoney video is really good and a good investment.

I use the center saver with cott> I briefly owned the McNasughton coring system, and found it

Reply to
william kossack

Andrew,

If you go back to the McNaughton system I will be happy to work through your difficulties with you. If it is used properly it will work well on your Nova. Mike Mahoney's DVD would be a great help.

Greg Jensen North American Rep Kelton Tools.

Reply to
Greg Jensen

Andy, I've had the McNaughton system for several years, and the only thing bad about it are the 'instructions' that come with it. They tell you almost nothing about how to really use the tool. It took a lot of trial and error, but now it works well for me. I've used the Nova at the local Woodcraft store here in Eugene for several demos, and found in to be okay. Definately, you have to use the lower gears/pulleys when coring. Also, I used to core in the 200 to 300 rpm speed range, but now its more like 500 to 800 rpms. This is not a tool to try to force, it does almost self feed. For almost all of my coring I use the medium set of blades, and now that they are available, the micro set work nicely on smaller pieces. The large set of blades are only necessary for large bowls, in the 16 inch and larger size, and that size doesn't sell well for me so I don't make too many. McNaughton new and improved the cutter head shape a few years back which greatly eased the tracking ability of the system. On the older blades, the cutter head was flush with the inside of the blade, and extended out past the outside of the blade.The newer blades come with a spear point that is wider than the blade on both the inside and outside. This makes it easier to correct the natural outward drift of the cut as you core. One accesory that you should make is a slip collar for post of the tool rest so that you don't have to adjust every time for the proper height. PVC pipe or end grain hard wood (I used cocobolo) work well. If you can get them, Fred Holder's More Woodturning had a 4 part series on the different coring systems from Feb. through May of 2004 (I think those are the months) One final thing, Mike Mahoney, an expert on using this system now has a DVD out on how to use the system. I got it to see how someone else uses the system. We don't do things quite the same way, due to different styles, but the principles are the same. The system does work. robo hippy

Andrew Barss wrote:

fairly

Reply to
robo hippy

Andrew,

You may want to take a look at Bill Grumbine's home page. He has a demonstration of the McNaughton system there. The address:

formatting link
He also has a great DVD on bowl turning.Harry

Reply to
Harry B. Pye

You can get the part comparing the systems as one pdf at the web site Fred set up for me.

formatting link
can get Joe's second part direct from him or as a More Woodturning back issue.

And get the Mahoney and Oneway and Woodcut tapes and compare techniques as well as systems (I believe the latter two are free).

For very small coring you can't match the Kelton. I have all three systems and it may surprise everyone, but I actually use the Woodcut the most often. Not as versatile as the others, but quick to set up and foolproof. Again, though, for very small stuff, nothing has the capabilities of the Kelton.

Lyn

Reply to
Lyn J. Mangiameli

: For very small coring you can't match the Kelton. I have all three : systems and it may surprise everyone, but I actually use the Woodcut the : most often. Not as versatile as the others, but quick to set up and : foolproof. Again, though, for very small stuff, nothing has the : capabilities of the Kelton.

That's what I was looking for -- I need to be able to salvage as much as I can from smallish pieces -- the ability to cut a 14" bowl from a 17" blank is nice, but not what I need.

-- Andy

Reply to
Andrew Barss

Hi Andy

Andy I do not have a coring system yet, but I have seen the use of the 3 systems that are most used and heard the comments of the turners that owned more than one system, and one of the comments that was uniform in the use of the Oneway system was, it's so easy to use there is no comparison.

The way our turners club president put it, (he has the McNaughton and the Oneway systems) "using the McNaughton is an adventure" and the Oneway was all production, effortless.

Also the view of a local member that makes his living, turning thousands of bowls, mostly Big leaf Maple, Australian and tropical burl wood, "I could not do it if I still had to use the McNaughton".

Oneway now has the large coring systems, a 16" and 20" and 24". New now, they have also mini systems, a 10" and 12".

I have an E-mail address here of a review of the Oneway system so you can have the opinion of some one else as well.

formatting link
the way I have no m> I briefly owned the McNasughton coring system, and found it

Reply to
Leo Van Der Loo

Leo, the problem is that though Oneway offers systems for lathes of various swings, they aren't making smaller knives. Only the Mini system of knives for the Kelton are going to perform the tasks that Andrew is most concerned about: maximum yeild from purchased woods; and smaller blanks (he mentions 9 inch and only 4 inches deep). The Oneway will at best only have one knive that will allow for a normal bowl shaped core in the sizes he discusses, and it will require a larger kerf. The Kelton will offer him more cores and smaller kerfs (with the mini set). I've encouraged Oneway to offer a smaller knive (about two years ago), but they haven't seen fit to go in that direction. BTW, the two smaller Oneway systems only offer one knife, which is pretty limiting.

I do like the Oneway for large corings and find it to be the safest and easist for that purpose. I tend to go with the Woodcut for coring medium sized blanks because I can very quickly set it up, reliably get two cores, and take it down with little fuss and muss. The Kelton excels at the smaller stuff and the unconventional, though I know a lot of folks are quite content using it for big stuff as well (Bill Grumbine and Mike Mahoney both stand out as examples). Obviously very few turners are going to get all of them, but I do think one's individual needs can go a long way towards pointing in the direction of one or another as being most suitable. For Andrew, particulary since he already has many of the Kelton components, getting a set of mini blades and the Mahoney video is likely a good path for him.

Lyn

Leo Van Der Loo wrote:

Reply to
Lyn J. Mangiameli

"Lyn J. Mangiameli" wrote: (clip) I tend to go with the Woodcut for coring medium sized blanks(clip) ^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Wookcut and One-way both control the knives very securely, at the cost of constraining the knife to a precisely circular path. Woodcut does it by swinging the tool on a turntable, with a fixed axis. One-way does it by introducing a curved toolrest, which supports the tool along a fixed arc. This means that both systems produce spherical bowl blanks. McNaughton, on the other hand, gives the turner more leeway in choosing the path of the cut. The result is that the bowls can be varied in shape somewhat. The price is a greater risk of catches, and more frayed nerves.

I watched a demonstration of the McNaughton system by our (then) club president. He was able to drop out one bowl after another without the slightest difficulty. In fact, he is so relaxed that he uses the system without the big handle--claims it works better that way. He has convinced even the skeptics in our group, including me.

Reply to
Leo Lichtman

Hi Lyn

I do understand what you are saying, but I find a 6" core a very small bowl blank, and that is what the Oneway is capable of doing at a minimum. The other thing is that Andy states that he briefly owned a system, and was reconsidering getting such a system, which in my view meant he does not own one now. If he still does have the coring system, than it would economically be a better way to add to that, certainly. The other reason I suggested the Oneway was for that Andy states that he found the McNaughton system hard to use. For what I have seen The Oneway is a much easier and safer system to use And also the way I understand the mechanical advantage of the Oneway system, it is a superior setup in my opinion, that does not take away of course, as you say that the McNaugthton is a very flexible system and certainly is being used successfully by some turners.

Have fun and take care Leo Van Der Loo

Lyn J. Mangiameli wrote:

Reply to
Leo Van Der Loo

Good comments Leo.

Another comment about the Oneway coring system (and probably several of the others) is that people seem to think that it cuts cores of ONLY spherical sections. This is way too simplistic and is using the system at its minimal functionality. While the cutters do scribe an arc, the center of that arc does not need to be on the centerline of the lathe.

Depending on the size of the blank and the choice of cutter you can cut near conical sections to almost flat sections. I will agree that if you want to do exactly what Mike Mahoney does, the McNaughton system is the best. It is probably the best for other jobs as well. But too many 'expert reviewers' seem to write off the other systems as limited when what is really limites is their imaginations.

Off my soapbox, back to sawdust. David

Leo Van Der Loo wrote:

Reply to
David Wade

I have both the mini and the large McNaughton blades. I tend to use the minis more often but that is because finding chunks large enough for the large blades is difficult. Wood sellers don't keep stuff large enough for the large McNaughton blades. Shoot in Denver they don't even have pieces large enough to bother coring.

I got my center savers last year dur> Leo,

Reply to
william kossack

This is certainly true and has been discussed by both Joe Fleming and myself, not to mention the folks at Oneway (interestingly, it is not demonstrated at all in my copy of the Oneway video on their system). It does not, however, seem to be the primary issue for Andrew. He is talking about obtaining maximum yield from what he describes as "pretty small pieces of wood."

It is not limited imagination to recognize that one system that offers knives of smaller arc and thinner blade will allow more yeild in "pretty small pieces." All coring systems, and indeed pretty much every tool is limited in some way or another. What is usually helpful for folks is to be able to recognize the limitations and weigh them against the capabilities, relative to their own needs. In my case, I think the Oneway system is superb for deep coring of large bowls because it is the only system that provides for internal support of the knife. But it cannot take out a hemispherical core of 3.5 inches due to the arc size of the smallest available knife, no matter how you twiddle with it.

Have you actually read my article comparing the systems? I received positive feedback from every one of the manufacturers except Stewart who did not comment. All three commented that they felt I did a good and fair job of describing and comparing their systems. Of course you may be more critical than they were.

Regardless, I use them all, with what imagination I have, as they meet my needs of the moment.

Now on to Leo

I agree that many will find a 6 inch hemispherical core to be a small bowl blank, but some (I'm one) find it quite desirable to obtain hemispherical cores of smaller size. It just isn't worth the trouble on common and "free" woods, but if you are working with very expensive or unusual woods, it is often quite nice to obtain small cores for bowls. I recently had some Amboyna burl which fits that description quite well. I made bowls as small as 2 inches (maybe unhandled tea cup might be a better descriptor) and it was quite attractive and appreciated by its recipient. Now such sizes are usually useless for the professional (though consider the size of most of Stocksdales bowls), or from a wood like plain Maple or Mahogany, but if from Blackwood or an old stash of Brazilian Rosewood, or Thuya burl, or some other highly figured or precious wood it becomes a different story. I get the impression that Andrew is speaking of just such woods (part of it is because he lives in the desert and buys most of his wood).

You are correct, I mis-remembered that and it does change the economic part of the equation.

And a good rationale, if not constrained by his needs to obtain maximum yeild from small pieces.

"Easier" covers a lot of territory. Is is easier to control the blade deep in a blank? Yes, I personally find the Oneway to be easier for me. But easier to use, well that includes things like set up, adjustment, and take down. The Oneway system is heavy and bulky to store. I don't consider it easy to get set up on the lathe (it is heavy and you have to bolt it on), or easy to dismount, or easy to store. I can put into use and remove from use both of its competitors in half the time of the Oneway. This is just the price one pays for the ruggedness and extra support. If one is going to spend a day coring bowls, the setup is inconsequential. If one is moving between tasks on the lathe, it is so much quicker and easier to just pop the Kelton or even the Woodcut into the banjo and have at it, then pop them back out.

and safer system to use

Yes, I think the Oneway is the safest system to use, both with respect to operator error and tool care. The Woodcut is not far behind, within its capabilities, perhaps even safer on smaller lathes with its tailstock support and almost foolproof set up.

For deep coring I think this is very true. It becomes much less of an issue for more shallow coring. that does not take away

I'm not a partisan for any of the systems. Each truly has its advantages and disadvantages and the more turners are aware of their own coring needs, and how the characteristics of the available systems will best interface with their needs, the more likely they will be satisfied with their choice. The only reason I've taken the time to stay with this thread is to emphasize that based on my personal familiarity with all of them, there is no single best system for all turners (and sometimes, as in my case, for even a single turner).

Lyn

Reply to
Lyn J. Mangiameli

I have wondered if the One Way system would be more versatile if it could be mounted on the banjo instead of a metal plate that you have to bolt to the ways. Is this even possible? robo hippy

william kossack wrote:

enough

collected

excels at

McNaughton".

Reply to
robo hippy

enough

collected

excels at

McNaughton".

Reply to
Derek Hartzell

: Hi Lyn

: I do understand what you are saying, but I find a 6" core a very small : bowl blank, and that is what the Oneway is capable of doing at a minimum. : The other thing is that Andy states that he briefly owned a system, and : was reconsidering getting such a system, which in my view meant he does : not own one now.

That's correct -- I sold the whole system two years ago, when the building that now houses my shop was being built.

Lyn's point about my needing coring for small blanks is correct -- there's not lot of free wood in Tucson, and so I buy most of what I turn, and that limits me to smaller bowl blanks.

I really want to thanks everyone who's participated in this thread -- it's been most helpful.

-- Andy

Reply to
Andrew Barss

Reply to
Phil Lackey

They will fit the regular handle, but you need a new tool rest, or an adapter which Craft Supplies, or probably any one else that sells the system has. robo hippy

Phil Lackey wrote:

smaller

safest and

Reply to
robo hippy

There is a tool support that replaces your tool rest that holds the blade and the handle to hold the blade. Make sure you get the one that will work with the mini blades because they are thinner. Some sellers may still have the older support which requires an 'adapter' to work with the mini blades.

I also have the kel hollowing tools so I use one handle for both

However, unless someone shows you how to use them I recommend the Mahoney video.

Phil Lackey wrote:

Reply to
william kossack

InspirePoint website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.