5 Sep
2009
5 Sep
'09
6:36 a.m.
On Sat, Sep 5, 2009 at 12:25 AM, Chuck Guzis<cclist at sydex.com> wrote:
That's been the rage for a few years with consumer
upright vacs,
particularly with the Dysons. ?The problem of course is that the
final filter is usually fairly expensive and slowly clogs during
operation. ?I've had a couple of the cyclonic ones and went back to a
double-layer disposable bag. ?I figure it runs about the same amount
of money for the same performance and I get like-new performance
every time I dump the bag.
Dysons are all we use. The problem for us is that we have 9 kids who
like to destroy the house. So vacuuming for us usually involves
things like breakfast cereal. We were filling so many bags that it
was getting expensive. We're weird though. But the cyclone dust
collectors are a different design. With vacuums, the debris has
nowhere to go, so it stays in the chamber whirling around. With dust
collectors, the dust gets collected in a barrel at the bottom. Also,
the filters on dust collectors can usually be cleaned out and washed.
Whereas vacuum filters are replaceable. Razor and blade business
model I guess.
Cyclonic may work well for wood debris, but I
wouldn't give you a
plugged nickel for a shop vac with cyclonic separation sucking up
sheetrock sanding dust on a foggy winter day.
Sheetrock is a different matter. The dust is so fine that you need a
filter. In fact, I have to use special sheetrock filters on my
shopvac.
And a 1x2 isn't 1" x 2". ?It's been
that way forever. ?The plywood
I've purchased over the last 3 decades have all called out the actual
finished sanded thickness. ?Is unsanded CDX the actual "nominal"
thickness? ?I think so.
2-by is different. That nominal dimension is what the 2x4 was before
planing (or so the theory goes), so after it's been planed and
smoothed, a separate service, it's slightly smaller.
I'm not sure about CDX, although I would assume that it's too thin
also. But 3/4" birch or oak plywood that you could use in a nice
furniture project is definitely not 3/4" anymore. It's the nominal
thing.
The quality of the veneers used in modern plywood
bothers me more
than a 1/32" thickness variation. ?The mills don't even have the
equipment to handle big peeler logs anymore--they'll even take 5 and
6 inch logs as veneer. ?It ain't what it used to be.
I agree. The veneers are practically paper. I've sort of sworn off
plywood for furniture projects, except as maybe an interior second
wood. It splinters and chips out when you machine it. And you have
to hide the edge. Then there's voids. And you can't even count on it
staying flat these days. Gluing up panels from real wood is the way
to go.
brian