Goblet base diameter

Most of mine have the base either the same size, or (mostly non-intentionally!) ever so slightly larger. That having been said, taking a peek at many of our "real" wine glasses, many of them do in fact have bases slightly smaller than the bowls, so who knows?

I'd imagine that with a base too much smaller than the bowl that they'd look a little "unbalanced", somehow, especially when they have a short stem. The longer the stem, the less you'd notice any slight unintentional difference.

I like mine a tad smaller, but I don't put "feet' on my bowls, either. If it's for looks only, go with what pleases you. If it's for possible use, you have to either counterweight or counter leverage at the base. Awful lot of "artsy" stuff barely stands on its own, but then again, that's all it has to do.

Agreed that a slightly smaller foot looks nicer generally than one that is equal to or larger than the bowl. I also have a fairly strong opinion on the shape of a goblet's base. When I see a wooden goblet turned endgrain (as most of them are) that has a flat base, turned thin, I wonder how long it will stand up without breaking. I opinionate that it is a mistake to emulate the shape of glass goblets without taking into account the properties of wood and it's grain. A conical shaped base is much stronger, and looks better to me--that's my 2 pennies :-)

Ken Grunke

Two points on this:

1) No doubt most people turn same-sized bowls/bases is because they are using the maximum size of their stock.

2) If I turn a goblet that I know is being used for actual drinking, I try to make a point of making the base at least a little larger than the bowl, so it's not going to tip over as easily with a cargo of liquid in it.

-- Chuck *#:^) chaz3913(AT)yahoo(DOT)com Anti-spam sig: please remove "NO SPAM" from e-mail address to reply. <

September 11, 2001 - Never Forget

one on the left has a coat of Waterlox on it. The others are unfinished. They range from 8" to 13" tall. randy

Check out

how they have been making them for the last 200 years. Some are samediameter as bowl, some are less.I would say, "If it looks right - it is right," BillR

These goblets are top class, very nice--as is all your work. I went on to look at the rest of your site, and see that you do multi-axis turning. Can't decide which one I like best, probably the red gum box in your Gallery section.

I'm producing on a limited basis a multi-axis chuck which attaches to a

4-jaw scroll chuck or faceplate, and can be seen at:

to me like you have the chuck situation well covered, though. I'm curious to know what you use for the eccentric turnings--are they done on your ornamental lathe? Looks like you have some tilt as well as lateral adjustment. Escoulen chuck, maybe? thanks,

Ken Grunke

These goblets are top class, very nice--as is all your work. I went on to look at the rest of your site, and see that you do multi-axis turning. Can't decide which one I like best, probably the red gum box in your Gallery section.

I'm producing on a limited basis a multi-axis chuck which attaches to a

4-jaw scroll chuck or faceplate, and can be seen at:

to me like you have the chuck situation well covered, though. I'm curious to know what you use for the eccentric turnings--are they done on your ornamental lathe? Looks like you have some tilt as well as lateral adjustment. Escoulen chuck, maybe? thanks,

Ken Grunke

I see what you mean, George, but I'm not talking radically smaller... maybe 10% or so?

mac

Please remove splinters before emailing

Hi Ken,

Thanks for the comments. For most of the eccentric work, I just use a Stronghold chuck ... then just insert it into the chuck at various angles. This gives me tilt but doesn't do parallel axis like on your attachment. When I want that, I take a two of the jaws out of the chuck, rotate it, then put the jaws back in. And that holds the work at an axis parallel to the original. But...it's pretty limited compared that what can be done with yours. And dangerous because of those jaws sticking out.

randy

Not radical, but what pleases my eye. May not work for yours. I have sneaked a few washers in a modest recess and plugged for counterweight on some I went a bit too radical on.

How about a thin brass disk with your name and info engraved on it, flush set in a forstner hole?

mac

Please remove splinters before emailing

Good link. I was looking for some info on candlestick designs and proportions and this helped out. Thanks

-- Martin Long Island, New York

SNIP.............

I looked at your site. First, nice work, at reasonable prices! Second, a question about your tops. You have a wide range of top designs, from thin platter like discs to smallwer diameter, more barrel or spherical shapes; which spin the best? Does either shape have any stability or spin time advantages?

Ken Moon Webberville, TX

Hi Ken,

The flattish ones seem to spin the best. But the main reason I tend to make them that way is that there's more room for design effects.

randy