# Random Orbit sanders



## BCramer (Apr 7, 2011)

I have been wood working for 8 years- 5 years of fine funiture making and I have never had or used a random orbit sander. My pad sander is now starting to feel like running a jackhammmer.:no: So, I am looking at 5" sanders random orbit sanders. I have done reaserch, but I can't decide between the Milwaukee or Dewalt. I was leaning tward the Milwaukee, but then I saw the new Dewalt low profile sanders. I also found out that Porter Cable has a low profile sander as well. All of these tools are lower or around my $100 price limit. Is there a huge benifit to the lower profile sanders? I looked at both of them and I would choose the Porter Cable over the Dewalt. What would you reccomend? 

Thanks


----------



## CPNMike (Jan 8, 2010)

I have a DeWalt that I have used for several years without any problems. The only negative thing I could say about it would be that it's a bit heavy, but I haven't used any others so I don't know if they're all this heavy or not.


----------



## diywoodworker (Jul 27, 2011)

My dad has a DeWalt random orbit sander. He does like it a lot. I used it a few times and it's very smooth. I agree that it is a bit heavy, but that helps the weight of the sander to remove more material, which can be beneficial.

I personally have a Black and Decker random orbit sander that I got from lowe's for $20. Comparing side by side, the black and decker feels like it vibrates a bit harder if you hold the tool on the top (or the jug handle), but when holding the tool with your hand around the motor spot, it's almost identical. The dust collection bag on the Black and Decker is superior to the DeWalt. The DeWalt picks up almost all of the dust though, so that's nothing to worry about. I bought the black and decker because it had a pretty good warranty, and I could buy 4 of these for the same price as one DeWalt. http://www.lowes.com/pd_362160-70-R...decker+ros&N=0&langId=-1&storeId=10151&rpp=24


My dad's DeWalt has variable speed, which could be an important factor to you. It was not to me though.


----------



## Gene Howe (Feb 28, 2009)

If you can, you might want to run a Rigid side by side with any of the others you mentioned. I have a PC and a Rigid. Both excellent sanders but the Rigid is smoother running, less tiring to use.
In either case, I wouldn't consider the hook and loop system because they seem to lose grip really fast.


----------



## MariahHolt (Jul 21, 2010)

Wood magazine did a review back in the October 2008 issue# 186. Between all the major players out there and they liked both the Milwaukee 6021-21 and the Porter-Cable 390K.
Personally I have a Dewalt single speed version. I find it sometimes gets away from me if I'm working where I've got my arm reaching way out there. If I was going to buy it again I would upgrade to the variable speed so I could slow it down if needed.


----------



## firemedic (Dec 26, 2010)

Gene Howe said:


> If you can, you might want to run a Rigid side by side with any of the others you mentioned. I have a PC and a Rigid. Both excellent sanders but the Rigid is smoother running, less tiring to use.
> In either case, I wouldn't consider the hook and loop system because they seem to lose grip really fast.


+1

I have the Ridgid 5" & 6" ROS and like them both. I gravitated toward the ridgids for 2 reasons. First their cordless tool are terrific. Second there is a store nearby that sells the refurbed ryobi/ milw/ ridgid family of tools so the sanders were too good a deal to pass up!

~tom


----------



## sawdustfactory (Jan 30, 2011)

Have 2 PC, 1 5hole, 1 8hole, both variable speed. 8 hole collects more dust, but like the feel of the 5 hole better. Both hook/loop, no issues at all so long as you don't try to sand with the Velcro. 8 hole is more torquey, wants to run away from you every so often.


----------



## mn pete (Dec 10, 2010)

Another vote for the Ridgids. I also have the 5" and 6" models (they're both older, so the 6" is the Metabo/German made) and they both run very smooth. I've only compared them a Craftsman and a Porter Cable though, so no Milwaukee or DeWalt experience.


----------



## BCramer (Apr 7, 2011)

Thanks Guys! So how do the compact random orbit sander really compare to a regular style sander?


----------



## Tricktech (Feb 2, 2012)

I have tried and lived with a few of the units mentioned above and unfortunately the old adage holds true, you get what you pay for.

I recently added a Porter-Cable 390K low profile 5" ROS to the shop and at $90, it's awesome, smooth running, non-fatiguing wide flat top, and a range of speeds on the dial that makes sense. It's an 8 hole design and the dust collection is ok, but none of them are great. I would imagine the LP Dewalt runs out much the same.

From my experience I have found that the quality control or build quality of the pad makes the biggest impact on you comfort or enjoyment level using the tool. The flatter or more "true" the pad, smoother and more controlled a "feel" the unit will have. Even the $20 Skil or B&D can work really well if you get a good one.

The other big impact item for me is then the power output. The cheap ROS's are easy to slow down... Dramatically... When needing to apply a little more pressure to your workpiece. The PC I just got and my old Milwaukee I think I would have to stand on to slow them down much. The Makita and Bosch are close, but where a little cheaper models at the time..

Again, you get what you pay for.


----------



## Bob Willing (Jul 4, 2008)

I had the Makita and after 8 years replaced it with the Bosch VS. I bought it at Lowes and was able to try how well the H&L paper stuck to all of the ROS they had and the Bosch beat every one hands down. The only down side is the dust collector is very hard to open. But for the money I would not trade the Bosch. I like the VS control and how well it collects the dust. I sand oak almost exclusively for my gun racks.


----------



## diywoodworker (Jul 27, 2011)

Tricktech said:


> I recently added a Porter-Cable 302 low profile 5" ROS to the shop and at $90, it's awesome, smooth running, non-fatiguing wide flat top, and a range of speeds on the dial that makes sense. It's an 8 hole design and the dust collection is ok, but none of them are great. I would imagine the LP Dewalt runs out much the same.
> 
> From my experience I have found that the quality control or build quality of the pad makes the biggest impact on you comfort or enjoyment level using the tool. The flatter or more "true" the pad, smoother and more controlled a "feel" the unit will have. Even the $20 Skil or B&D can work really well if you get a good one.


How many different hand positions are there for the PC sander? I can only visualize one.


Thanks for the note about the flatness of a pad affecting the feel of the tool. I hadn't thought of it.


----------



## Tricktech (Feb 2, 2012)

diywoodworker said:


> How many different hand positions are there for the PC sander? I can only visualize one.


There is only one, but the top is so wide that you find several variations and since you put so much less effort into stabilizing any height, it's just more relaxed overall. Definitely less fatiguing.

Tricky


----------



## cocheseuga (Dec 15, 2010)

Good thread. I have a 18V Ryobi and it does the job for small tasks, but I'll need something with more oomph. I love the design of the Ridgid 6", just wish it wasn't 6".


----------



## diywoodworker (Jul 27, 2011)

Along with your sander, you're going to need some sandpaper. Here's the best information I could find comparing the different brands of sandpaper. 
http://www.woodmagazine.com/woodworking-tools/reviews/sanders/sanding-discs/

And here's a visual chart comparing the different types (from a link on that page): http://images.meredith.com/wood/pdf/SandpaperAggressivenessChart2.pdf


----------



## user27606 (Feb 6, 2012)

i'd say go with the ridgid one i bought one for use at work and the bigest problem i have is keeping it from being borrowed.

at the shop we got dewalts porter cables mikitas and two air powered ones. the ridgid stands as the most popular with all of us. thats coming from guys like me with big hands and others with small hands.

they sell a pad for use with psa papers too


----------



## MastersHand (Nov 28, 2010)

BCramer said:


> I have been wood working for 8 years- 5 years of fine funiture making and I have never had or used a random orbit sander. My pad sander is now starting to feel like running a jackhammmer.:no: So, I am looking at 5" sanders random orbit sanders. I have done reaserch, but I can't decide between the Milwaukee or Dewalt. I was leaning tward the Milwaukee, but then I saw the new Dewalt low profile sanders. I also found out that Porter Cable has a low profile sander as well. All of these tools are lower or around my $100 price limit. Is there a huge benifit to the lower profile sanders? I looked at both of them and I would choose the Porter Cable over the Dewalt. What would you reccomend?
> 
> Thanks


Depends on how serious you're doing Woodwork for. If you are developing a shop and you have air. Go with a Air Random Orbit Sander. Well worth the price

Sent from my iPhone using Wood Forum


----------



## user27606 (Feb 6, 2012)

*mr. hand sir*

air ro sanders are good quickly getting up to speed for start stop start jobs

the ridgid has soft start good for not burning your material and speed controll for throttle.

there are plusses for each but i think the ridgid is the preferential winner it sucks up the dust controlls rpms doesnt bog down when you press on it can be used with hook loop or psa discs has a long lighted cord and is an easy to fing orange color.

but thats just my opinion and we all know what those are like :blink:


----------



## Leo G (Oct 16, 2006)

I've been using a DeWalt lower profile sander for at least 15 years now. It has been a good sander and I would recommend it. But I have gone way beyond your price point and purchased a Mirka Ceros. Awesome sander. Can't say enough good things about it. Great power, very light weight, really, really low profile, paddle handle is great, variable speed if you so choose. Requires a vacuum for dust collection as it doesn't self generate. But I use a small 4 gallon Rigid and dust collection is great. It is the equivelent of an air sander in an electric. Very well thought out.


----------



## BCramer (Apr 7, 2011)

Thank you for all you replys. I am lacking a decent air compressor so pnematics are out of my option. I am becoming more serios about woodworking wich is why I am considering adding a random orbit sander.


----------



## ShaneLyall (Jan 12, 2010)

+1 for the Porter Cable. I bought 1 a year ago just to give them a try. As for hand positions, you can hold it by the dust filter and sart of cup it with your other hand as well as hold it from the top.


----------



## chirpfarm (Jan 30, 2012)

+1 for the Ridgid. I got one for Christmas, and it is very smooth. Dust collection is ok without a vac, very good with one. The on/off switch takes a little getting used to, but is easier to use once you figure it out.


----------



## WarnerConstInc. (Nov 25, 2008)

Get a Rotex. Leo you are such a Mirka snob now.:laughing:


----------



## troyd1976 (Jul 26, 2011)

i have the porter-cable 390pk (low profile)..i gotta say after useing it, using the standard ROS is just awkward. also great if you have a carcass built and have some smaller areas like shelves to get into where a standard 10 gallon hat ROS wont fit
also just running the dust canister, with the 8 hole's on these sanders im actually quite impressed with how much it picks up. really need to try it sometime hooked to a shop vac. lol.


----------



## Leo G (Oct 16, 2006)

WarnerConstInc. said:


> Get a Rotex. Leo you are such a Mirka snob now.:laughing:


It's a good sander. Just like an air sander. I have been using Mirka sandpaper for a while now. I haven't touched the DeWalt in weeks, not even sure where it is:blink:


----------



## WarnerConstInc. (Nov 25, 2008)

Yeah, I agree. It is a great shop sander for sure. I wouldn't want to drag it out in the field with me though.


----------



## Leo G (Oct 16, 2006)

Who needs to sand out in the field. Do all the work in the shop and then just install in the field. :w00t:


----------



## Cliff (Feb 5, 2012)

BCramer said:


> I have been wood working for 8 years- 5 years of fine funiture making and I have never had or used a random orbit sander.


_*And you never will. *_


There is no such thing. 



Leave the word "random" off it and your description will be accurate. 
A mechanism that would produce random orbital action would be an amazing piece of engineering. The orbits of orbital sanders are utterly and completely non random. They are precisely fixed by the eccentric of the mechanism under the sanding pad.


----------



## cocheseuga (Dec 15, 2010)




----------



## BCramer (Apr 7, 2011)

Thanks for all the responses! I never knew the orbit in random orbit sander-excuse me orbital sanders :laughing: is not really random. I think I will now consider the low profile Porter Cable.


----------



## Cliff (Feb 5, 2012)

BCramer said:


> I never knew the orbit in random orbit sander-excuse me orbital sanders :laughing: is not really random.


I forget the who and when part of my attention being drawn to this bit of information, but I recall wondering how it was that throughout my past in the hobby and trade that I never once questioned the phrase Random Orbital Sander. If I had, it would have probably occurred to me how improbable the "random" part of the phrase was.

There are so very many places where we take the things around us at face value and fail to ask critical questions about them.


----------



## WillemJM (Aug 18, 2011)

Like you, I have never used a ROS, after 35 years of building furniture. I purchased a Dewalt, the one with the variable speed recently and not impressed. It won't see much use. It's not the brand, but rather the concept.

Normally where possible, I would take off 0.002" with a hand plane on my parts prior to assembly and what remains just do by hand, which is minimal.

If I really have to sand, a portable belt sander works much better and a fine grit belt helps not to go over-board.


----------



## Santa's Workshop (May 16, 2011)

hard to beat Ridgid's lifetime service policy.


----------



## Bob Willing (Jul 4, 2008)

*For the record*



Cliff said:


> _*And you never will. *_
> 
> 
> There is no such thing.
> ...



A quick Google gave me this, an article from Popular Mechanics.


ORBITAL SANDERS
Standard orbital sanders have a square sanding pad that's connected to the motor by an eccentric shaft. When the motor spins, the pad moves in tiny circles, about 1/16 in. in diameter, and the sandpaper grains create circular scratches. When using an orbital sander, keep sanding marks to a minimum by applying gentle pressure and by thoroughly sanding the entire surface so it's uniformly abraded. And remember, staining will accentuate sanding marks. If you plan to stain, it's best to hand sand, with the grain, after smoothing with an orbital sander.
Like most orbital sanders, the Craftsman 27984 we tested accepts a 1/4-sheet of sandpaper and holds it in place with lever clamps. We also tested the Bosch 1294VSK detail sander--an orbital sander with a small triangular pad that extends beyond the tool housing so you can smooth into tight corners. The pad can be rotated 120 degrees to make the most of each abrasive sheet, and deep extension pads enable you to reach into crevices. It's the ideal tool for working between the slats of a shutter or cleaning up inside corners in a frame-and-panel door.

Random-Orbit Sanders
Take an orbital sander, install a round pad and allow the disc to spin freely as well as orbit, and you've got a random-orbit (RO) sander. Because the disc is freewheeling, its speed varies with the pressure applied to it, while the orbital action is tied to the motor speed. This combination of two motions produces a more irregular, or random, sanding action that's more aggressive than orbital alone, yet capable of producing a fine finish.
Unlike an orbital sander that's switched on first, then put in contact with the wood, it's best to start up an RO sander while it's on the wood. This will help prevent gouging from the spinning disc. Even though random-orbit sanders produce a less obvious scratch pattern than orbital models, it's still safest to finish with hand sanding if you're going to stain. We tested two models of this type: the palm-grip Ridgid R2600 and the Makita BO6030 two-handle version. Both are variable-speed tools, so you can dial back aggressiveness. The Makita, with its larger disc, has the edge on sanding speed over broad surfaces.

Read more: Power Sander Comparison Test - Popular Mechanics 

http://www.popularmechanics.com/hom...random-orbital-sander-comparison-test#slide-1


----------



## Cliff (Feb 5, 2012)

Bob Willing said:


> allow the disc to spin freely as well as orbit, and you've got a random-orbit (RO) sander. Because the disc is freewheeling, its speed varies with the pressure applied to it, .


Well, learn something every day~!! 
Or maybe not.

I suspect that any putative randomness would be negated by centripetal force driving the orbit of the thing to the extreme perimeter of the confines of the orbital track. I suppose there'd be exceptions when it got it's rhythm all spazzed and vibrated out of the periphery but random - - probably not so much. 
Seems like the mechanism would have some serious wear problems.
That is if indeed such a thing existed. 

But looking at these 
http://www.ereplacementparts.com/makita-bo5001-random-orbit-sander-parts-c-97_103_372.html
http://www.ereplacementparts.com/dewalt-dw421-type-random-orbit-sander-parts-c-1009_2742_2753.html
http://www.ereplacementparts.com/bo...andom-orbit-sander-parts-c-128_1044_1232.html

I am seeing a very tightly locked mechanism that uses a fixed orbit and a bearing on a shaft and nothing that would produce anything random at all. 

Makes me wonder if the writers of the Pop mechanics article were not just blowing smoke. I think they were.


----------



## dodgeboy77 (Mar 18, 2009)

I like the Bosch 20VSK. Eventually I wore out the pad on mine (the sanding discs weren't sticking well) and until I got it repaired I bought a second one. Now one has the fine paper on it and the the other has the medium, so I don't have to change paper as much.

Bill


----------



## cocheseuga (Dec 15, 2010)

Since the industry has been calling it a ROS since forever, and most likely will do so forever, I'm comfortable using the term and don't care if it's technically not correct.


----------



## ctwiggs1 (Mar 30, 2011)

a recent Fine Woodworking tool test found the Milwaukee to be the best.

I have a DeWalt and love it though


----------



## Rick C. (Dec 17, 2008)

I have the Bosch and love it. Had a B&D but when the magic smoke came out of the motor it quit runnin' and was replaced.


----------



## Bob Willing (Jul 4, 2008)

Cliff said:


> Well, learn something every day~!!
> Or maybe not.
> 
> I suspect that any putative randomness would be negated by centripetal force driving the orbit of the thing to the extreme perimeter of the confines of the orbital track. I suppose there'd be exceptions when it got it's rhythm all spazzed and vibrated out of the periphery but random - - probably not so much.
> ...


 
Just googled and found this the guy at PM are not just blowing smoke http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Random_orbital_sander I guess what you don't see is a drawing of the shape of each part only it's location relative to purchasing a replacement part.


----------



## rrbrown (Feb 15, 2009)

Not sure about the Dewalt and PC but they are the same company. I have one of each not low profile and they are almost identical except for the dust port is slightly different. That may be because I bought them a year apart. Either way they both work, feel and look the same.

Ironically B&D bought Dewalt, Delta and Porta Cable.


----------



## Cliff (Feb 5, 2012)

Bob Willing said:


> Just googled and found this the guy at PM are not just blowing smoke http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Random_orbital_sander I guess what you don't see is a drawing of the shape of each part only it's location relative to purchasing a replacement part.


The Google article is little more than regurgitated pap plagiarized from other places of equally unreliable substance. 

It seems that the authors had got themselves accustomed to the phrase Random Orbit and internalized it so completely that when they wrote their articles their unthinking acceptance of the idea of random led them to just make it all up, not out of some dark impulse, but rather because they were too lazy to research anything and took too much for granted.
Wikipedia is not a scholarly enterprise


----------



## cabinetman (Jul 5, 2007)

Cliff said:


> The Google article is little more than regurgitated pap plagiarized from other places of equally unreliable substance.
> 
> It seems that the authors had got themselves accustomed to the phrase Random Orbit and internalized it so completely that when they wrote their articles their unthinking acceptance of the idea of random led them to just make it all up, not out of some dark impulse, but rather because they were too lazy to research anything and took too much for granted.
> Wikipedia is not a scholarly enterprise


So, what would you call it?










 







.


----------



## Cliff (Feb 5, 2012)

cabinetman said:


> So, what would you call it?


Well I think the use of the word "random" is pretty optimistic: imaginative really.

Here is a Patent for one:
http://www.idealawyers.com/patents/7713110.pdf
Looking at the drawing there is no way that design can produce random action. It can produce a slight rotation and an orbit and I am guessing that this combination of actions is sufficient to inspire such language as "random" but random is not a thing that lends itself to any mechanical device or linkage. 



Computers can be programmed to use things like PI to develop what certainly appears to be random numbers. But they are not really random. They are subsequent to a very precise calculation. It may not repeat itself, but that's not random.


----------



## cabinetman (Jul 5, 2007)

Cliff said:


> Well I think the use of the word "random" is pretty optimistic: imaginative really.
> 
> Here is a Patent for one:
> http://www.idealawyers.com/patents/7713110.pdf
> ...


I just asked a simple question...what would you call it?










 







.


----------



## diywoodworker (Jul 27, 2011)

cabinetman said:


> I just asked a simple question...what would you call it?


NCBPRHDS?

Non-Cyclically but Predictably Rotating Handheld Disc Sander?



I think I'll stick with Random Orbit Sander.


----------



## weavilswoodshop (Sep 3, 2010)

*Whats in a name????????*

"Whats in a name? That which we call a rose would by any other name smell as sweet" _Shakespeare :1600 or whatever.._

I would have a hard time offering a suggestion on which _ROS_ to buy. I have found a few of the less costly to do a pretty good job. I have went through Skill, B&D, PC and now use 2 Dewalts and a Bosch. I really like one of my Dewalts but the other(same model) pulls quite a bit and makes it unconfortable to use so my take is that even within the same brands you'll find some are better than others.



(By the way, my wifes name is "Rose")


----------



## Cliff (Feb 5, 2012)

cabinetman said:


> I just asked a simple question...what would you call it?


Didn't I say "Imaginative" and "optimistic"? 
That's what I'd call it. 
I sure wouldn't call it random. 

Or maybe you are asking what I'd call the sander mechanism? 
The word "it" didn't inform me which concept it was to which you were referring. 
The mechanism isn't random, but it is a little more complicated than a simple orbit. It's one orbit inside or adjacent to another, so I suppose "dual action" might be a better way of describing it.


----------



## cabinetman (Jul 5, 2007)

Cliff said:


> Didn't I say "Imaginative" and "optimistic"?
> That's what I'd call it.
> I sure wouldn't call it random.
> 
> ...


So, to make sure I understand you, you would call "it" (what is commonly called a ROS), a dual action sander?










 







.


----------



## Leo G (Oct 16, 2006)

They are commonly called D/A sanders.


----------



## firemedic (Dec 26, 2010)

Leo G said:


> They are commonly called D/A sanders.


I didn't know DA sanders oscillated... Learn something every day!

~tom "Ignorance is not a lack of intelligence - it's a lack of know-how"


----------



## Cliff (Feb 5, 2012)

cabinetman said:


> So, to make sure I understand you, you would call "it" (what is commonly called a ROS), a dual action sander?.



Well yah why not? Makes sense doesn't it?


----------



## firemedic (Dec 26, 2010)

firemedic said:


> I didn't know DA sanders oscillated... Learn something every day!
> 
> EDIT* I meant 'orbited'
> 
> ~tom "Ignorance is not a lack of intelligence - it's a lack of know-how"


~tom "Ignorance is not a lack of intelligence - it's a lack of know-how"


----------



## cabinetman (Jul 5, 2007)

Leo G said:


> They are commonly called D/A sanders.


In my neck-o-woods an air sander is referred to as a DA.
http://www.northerntool.com/shop/tools/product_14325_14325?issearch=1581










 







.


----------



## Leo G (Oct 16, 2006)

Air or electric, they both have a orbit and a random action pad hence the name Dual Action.


----------



## firemedic (Dec 26, 2010)

I guess I had something else back in Jr high. Used it to sand my old 89' GMC Jimmy before painting 

Air powered 6" pad... Definitely no "dual action."

~tom "Ignorance is not a lack of intelligence - it's a lack of know-how"


----------



## Bob Willing (Jul 4, 2008)

Cliff said:


> Well yah why not? Makes sense doesn't it?


Well I guess coming from an expert why not. If you are an expert you can call it anything you want and discount all of the other experts. Right? I guess we could say "the auxiliary compensator won’t rehabilitate the actuator", which makes as much sense!


----------



## cabinetman (Jul 5, 2007)

Bob Willing said:


> Well I guess coming from an expert why not. If you are an expert you can call it anything you want and discount all of the other experts. Right? I guess we could say "the auxiliary compensator won’t rehabilitate the actuator", which makes as much sense!





















 







.


----------



## RAplin9 (Mar 27, 2011)

Festool is by far the best. All it their tools outperform the brands mentioned. More money but since you make fine furniture. Then get their accompanying dust collection and your nose will love you!!


----------



## Cliff (Feb 5, 2012)

Bob Willing said:


> and discount all of the other experts.



What other experts are these - exactly - ? 
Those two idiots who wrote articles with not one single substantiating external fact? You call them experts? 
Why? Because they put it on the internet?


----------



## cocheseuga (Dec 15, 2010)

More 'experts'

http://www.bobvila.com/articles/2143-finishing-sanders/pages/1

http://www.waterfront-woods.com/Projects/airsander.html

http://www.toolsofthetrade.net/industry-news.asp?articleID=1200315&sectionID=1493



> Under no-load conditions, the combined motion is relatively uniform, and a dot marked on the sanding pad often traces what looks like a spirograph pattern. But once the pad touches the work the equilibrium is broken and the tool moves more randomly, changing rotation speed and orbit shape in response to varying pressure from the user.


----------



## Al B Thayer (Dec 10, 2011)

RAplin9 said:


> Festool is by far the best. All it their tools outperform the brands mentioned. More money but since you make fine furniture. Then get their accompanying dust collection and your nose will love you!!


I just don't get the fascination with Festool. I'm sure they are made well but they look like kitchen appliances. Also it should be understood that tools made in socialist countries carry a high price due to the taxes they pay. Their sales tax is over 37% on most items. People pay in taxes what the average US worker takes home. All their products come to us with a heavy vat. Just sayin.

Al

Friends don't let friends use Craftsman.


----------



## GeorgeC (Jul 30, 2008)

I have not been reading this thread, but just why is it so long?

G


----------



## WillemJM (Aug 18, 2011)

cocheseuga said:


> More 'experts'
> 
> http://www.bobvila.com/articles/2143-finishing-sanders/pages/1
> 
> ...


I thought an "Ex" = a has been and a "Spert" = a drip under pressure?


----------



## WillemJM (Aug 18, 2011)

GeorgeC said:


> I have not been reading this thread, but just why is it so long?
> 
> G


Times are tough, we don't have enough work to keep us busy.:huh:


----------



## Cliff (Feb 5, 2012)

cocheseuga said:


> More 'experts'
> 
> http://www.bobvila.com/articles/2143-finishing-sanders/pages/1
> 
> ...


Bob Villa is a dishonest idiot of the worst sort and has been sued successfully as a scam artist liar and cheater. 
And he is your "expert"? 
Villa is a damn fool.

Google 
Bob Villa Lawsuit 
and 
Bob Villa sued
That damn fool never knew a thing about the trades, he is just a bad show host and a scam artist. And he certainly knows nothing about machine design and engineering. 



> *from Christopherson's Dynabrade article*: What is "Random Orbit" To achieve random motion, the sanding pad is allowed to rotate freely. It is this free motion that reduces swirl marks because the marks are more random than the circular pattern that the human eye can quickly discern. If viewed under a microscope, the loops shown toward the outside of the drawing above are tighter, and closer to being straight lines.


What a load of doublespeak~!! He says it's random and then says it's too random for the eye to discern?? Too Random? WTF?? What is too random. It's either random - a myth - or it is not. 

He's just misusing the word random he is not describing a mechanism that can produce it. Mis use of a word does nothing to create a reality from the wrongly used word. 

Crisristopherson is just another example of someone defaulting to imaginative nonsense when he is trying (and failing) to describe something that does not exist. Note he can't show you a diagram of the mechanism? That's because there is none.




Michael Springer is another such non expert. He hasn't got an engineering degree and he certainly is no expert on mechanical linkages. Yet he heard the word "random" and his imagination has run away with him. 

Take his paragraph: 


> The random-orbit sander gets its wide range of capabilities from its action. The sanding pad is connected to a free spinning bearing, which is mounted off-center to a flywheel driven at full motor speed. This design gives the pad a full-diameter spinning motion along with a small wiggling action known as the orbit. The amount of orbital action is determined by how far off-center the pad is mounted and is called the orbit size.


A Free spinning bearing? What's the purpose of a bearing that is free spinning. What Rubbish~!! Bearings bear against something. 
But it gets better: The bearing is "mounted off center"
If the bearing is mounted to anything - anything at all - there is no random action it is a fixed arc - period - and the use of the word random is nonsense. 
Then the _*pièce de résistance*_ is where he stupidly uses the phrase: "more random" HA HA HA HA H A H A HAH 
More? Aww Jeeze It either is or it is not. 

And once again like every other self appointed internet sage spouting this line of hooey, he links to not one single external fact.

You'd think that in all this double speak and crap that if this Silken Unicorn were real that there would be a drawing or picture of the mechanism that produces this mythical random action.

Nope. 
It's like the word Kleenex or Xerox. It's just a word that caught on, it rolls off the tongue like curses at a soccer game. And once a certain number of people got to using it, others followed suit. So marketing people use it to describe their products the same way they claim that some soap "cleans better." People like you and I use it to describe that powered gizmo we sand things with, and idiots and damn fools engage in flights of fancy trying (and fail horribly) at trying to describe a non-existent mechanism that supposed to perform an entirely unnecessary task.


----------



## Cliff (Feb 5, 2012)

GeorgeC said:


> I have not been reading this thread, but just why is it so long?G



If I had to guess George, I'd have to guess that it's because (a) I slaughtered some one's silken pony unicorn of a sacred cow that and pissed someone off. and (b) the advocates of myth of random and I are stubborn as hell. 

This is starting to look like a theological debate where one person insists on some magical fairy dust thing and insists that I accept as proof the fact that they can find others who also insist on the magical fairy dust thing.

I mean if Bob Villa says it ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~


----------



## woodnthings (Jan 24, 2009)

*Lots of interesting discussion but....*

ROS, who cares?
What matters to me is "Does it sand?" if so, I really don't care about much else, as long as it doesn't hurt the wood, my wallet or my hands. I want it to remove excess wood in some cases and smooth existing wood in preparation for a finish, the smoother the better. For the best surface finish, hand sanding or a card scraper is the way to go as far as I know. JMO.  bill 

BTW I agree the word "random" is a little understood mathematical term and is widely misused as a generic for anything whose mechanism moves in an "unpredictable" manner. My son uses the word to describe events such as a car is parked randomly, or it randomly appeared. It has a whole 'nother meaning to teens.


----------



## Cliff (Feb 5, 2012)

woodnthings said:


> ROS, who cares?
> What matters to me is "Does it sand?"


Excellent point.


----------



## cocheseuga (Dec 15, 2010)

Cliff said:


> If I had to guess George, I'd have to guess that it's because (a) I slaughtered some one's silken pony unicorn of a sacred cow that and pissed someone off. and (b) the advocates of myth of random and I are stubborn as hell.
> 
> This is starting to look like a theological debate where one person insists on some magical fairy dust thing and insists that I accept as proof the fact that they can find others who also insist on the magical fairy dust thing.
> 
> I mean if Bob Villa says it ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~


Funny, I'm not seeing any proof from your side of the argument, just opinions from some self-appointed internet sage.


----------



## Cliff (Feb 5, 2012)

cocheseuga said:


> Funny, I'm not seeing any proof from your side of the argument, just opinions from some self-appointed internet sage.


That's because (a) you are claiming that this silken pony of a unicorn exists and I'm saying it doesn't and here you are claiming that I need proof the negative: that the magical pixie fairy dust thing doesn't exist when you can't show that it does. 

It's also because (b) you lack sufficient mechanical sophistication to understand pretty much everything I've written. And you lack it so badly that you can't read with a critical eye any of the nonsense you are linking to. 

Learn to read with comprehension. 
You are the guy who linked to Bob Villa. 
Kind of hard to stand tall after that bit of un-thinking foolishness.


----------



## cocheseuga (Dec 15, 2010)

Whatever makes you feel better.


----------



## Leo G (Oct 16, 2006)

Sorry guys. This is just getting out of hand. A simple discussion has now turned to mythical creatures and magic powders.

Thread closed.


----------

