# crosscut sled/jig



## woodnthings (Jan 24, 2009)

This jig can be used for crosscutting longer boards as well as shorter ones on the table saw, usually an awkward operation.







I rounded over the edges so it won't "hang up" going over the front table edge.







By using 2 miter gauges you can make a cheap alternative to a sled. It doesn't reduce the depth of cut and the back brace used typically, is really not necessary. For those who only have the 2 slots available, just place one on either side of the blade. However, I can use the gauges in any of the slots.....another advantage of having multiple table(s).







The cut came out as square as can be.:thumbsup: bill


----------



## cabinetman (Jul 5, 2007)

What keeps the two miter gauges tandem?












 







.


----------



## woodnthings (Jan 24, 2009)

*what's your point?*



cabinetman said:


> What keeps the two miter gauges tandem?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Are you asking ..."Does it work?" Yes. Tandem? The miter slots are parallel, so when you push the board at the center they move together. I tried it of course, before I posted it. It's really no different than a sled without the back brace. The usual platform really serves no purpose other than limiting the thickness which can be cut. Just my opinion of course.....  bill


----------



## cabinetman (Jul 5, 2007)

Why are you defensive...I asked a simple question. I asked what keeps them tandem, which in my mind means both gauges would have to be rigidly connected. So, are you saying that you just push one gauge and the other moves in perfect sequence?

For one reason or another, if one gauge does not travel (in tandem) it puts the cut at risk by some angular movement (even so slightly). This could cause a binding and a catch (possibly kickback), which with a long board, or any length utilizing the two gauges, could be risky.

I'm not putting down your idea, just offering some discussion on the possibilities of an unsafe procedure. 












 







.


----------



## woodnthings (Jan 24, 2009)

They are "rigidly connected" by the board as shown here:


----------



## reprosser (May 19, 2010)

Neat idea. It looks better than a single miter gauge, but not (IMHO) as stable as a crosscut sled - but then, there is the difference in maximum cut thickness. The single board connect may warp over time and throw things off a bit, but a thicker connection - maybe layers of plywood - should help.


----------



## cabinetman (Jul 5, 2007)

woodnthings said:


> They are "rigidly connected" by the board as shown here:


So, what you're saying is that the board shown there has no flex whatsoever? Sleds are predominantly a fence fixed to a plate that's attached to either one or two miter slot runners. The fence is a rigid connection to the movement of the sled in the slots. IOW, the fence maintains (or is supposed to) a perpendicularity to the blade.

Your set up may not have displayed any problems. I'm envisioning a long board to be cross cut and having the ratio of weight to the left of the blade. That in itself puts a counterclockwise amount of torque on the fence. Reasonably, it may or may not be obvious, but to get a smooth pass, it will likely be felt by the hand that is pushing the fence.

Your idea has merit, but very few hobbyists, or professionals will have two saws in that proximity to each other, to give that much of a spread of miter slots. That distance is what I question as to how effective the integrity of the setup might be. 

Personally, I try to minimize how far from my work zone I have to handle the subject matter. Since I'm very concerned about shop safety and try to minimize the possibility of injury, I will pick the most suitable tool/machine to do the procedure at hand. For crosscuts on narrow or long pieces, those choices would likely be a RAS, MS/CMS/SCMS, a hand held circular saw, a jig saw, or a hand saw if necessary.












 







.


----------



## mdntrdr (Dec 22, 2009)

I like this idea, but would add a stiffener to the rear of the board. :smile:


----------



## woodnthings (Jan 24, 2009)

*crosscutting long boards on the TS*

I'm not a fan in ANY way. That's why I have a RAS set to 90 degrees permanently...however, not every shop is equipped with that. 
In addition, few shops have multiple table saws mounted together for the opportunity to use any of the miter slots available, so a *shorter* version would be applicable. You can make the "connector" board any length you need and any thickness you want to increase rigidity. You can also attach a stiffener board across the top if desired.
The advantage to this set up is that it's easy to make, assuming 2 (identical) miter gauges, easy to disassemble, accurate and will saw wider panels since there is no back brace to limit the width. :thumbsup: bill


----------



## AlWood (Apr 18, 2010)

woodnthings said:


> Are you asking ..."Does it work?" Yes. :thumbsup: Tandem? The miter slots are parallel, so when you push the board at the center they move together. I tried it of course, before I posted it. It's really no different than a sled without the back brace. The usual platform really serves no purpose other than limiting the width which can be cut. Just my opinion of course.....  bill



Bill, it is a nice idea, and I guess many people tried it. I did, and observed that the paired miter gauges do NOT provide precision -- and stability during the cut. For example, if the gauges are of different quality, or one experiences a slot resistance in its movement slightly different than the other -- one get appreciable angular vibration in the paired system as one moves it along. It might be OK for a rough cut, but than what is the point of the entire effort? Besides, the square angle is not precisely reproducible each time; also the backing board you are using is not thick enough to keep it from slight flexing. And then one is in real trouble with a long board for cross-cutting (say up to 8 feet, which is often my case when dadoing vertical for my shelves or cutting ends for long shelves... I frankly doubt that you kept checking the square precision each time you used that technique. I did, and let me assure you -- no way I'd use it when I need a good quality.

If I have time, I may post here in a few days my "monster" cross-cut sled (with only ONE cross-board -- such that there is no limit for the width of the board to be cut) - which is 6 feet wide...


----------



## woodnthings (Jan 24, 2009)

*Thanks Al*

I guess we had different results. I am open to suggestions however, and will add a stiffener brace across the top, but that unit slides so smoooothly there is no resistance or vibration. One trick I used after experimenting and wondering WHY it was not as smooth as I would like was to raise the connector board off the saw table the thickness of some 100 grit sandpaper...what a difference.:yes:
It may not be apparent but there are 3 different length boards in the thread, the long one, a short one and a medium shown with the stop clamp attached. You can see that the only structural piece connecting the 2 miter gauges is the 1 1/2" wide portion above the kerf.....not really enough if any significant force is applied to one side or the other. But my results didn't have the need for anywhere near that amount of force....smoooth. But for the sake of structural integrity I will add the upper cross brace at 90 degrees and that should remove all possibilities of flexing.:thumbsup:

As I stated way back, I'm not a fan of cross cutting longer boards on the table saw for the reasons you and others have mentioned. :no: I use my 12" RAS for that. But if someone needs to do it for any reason and uses adequate outboard support that will allow the board to glide without "stiction" (sticking and friction) then this setup will work fine.

By using the left gauge as the primary push handle, the right gauge because of it's close proximity to the left, is pretty much "along for the ride" as it would be on a sled with the top mounted surface and the runners attached to it.

http://www.woodworkingtalk.com/f2/evil-machine-28461/
I realize my approaches are not conventional and may not work for everyone, that's OK with me, but I throw the ideas out there if and they "stick" great, if not OK. That's what I think a forum like this is for, the exchange of ideas.  bill


----------



## BWSmith (Aug 24, 2010)

Yes,forums are for exchanging ideas.

Without going off the deep end,the declining personal responsibilty "train" is/has left a few in the station.Combining that with the general litigious cloud that hangs over............then its gonna be a fact of life that there will be self-made safety Nazi's,and/or a never ending aray of disclaimers.Further....as folks,internet "more" and work or produce,"less"....another level of experience or expertness rears its head.I read on the net that if you hit your finger with a hammer it really hurts vs finding out the hard way.


In some engineering/mathmatical ways the two mitre slide's tied together can only be more accurate than one.The paradigm may be that'll take more than a single contact point on each.Seeing as that may be too complicated at first thought then some will decide to stay in the "station".Those with enough spirit to try....may find that with a very slight change in the connecting theory/practicum,it will infact send accuracy potential off the chart.

I'd be looking for a direct reading scale,embedded within the fixtures framework so that tapers/angles could be cut as measured in arc seconds.....and this is one of the "why's" as to where two has an advantage over one.Safety is the trump here....another why,2-better-1.Its just,because isn't apparent at first glance it somehow must be "unsafe",......which may stifle discussion.


But then,I don't like sleds........the overiding reason is the thickness problem with said table's, sandwiched between work and machine top.This condition is avoided at all cost here......because.

>accuracy...its a disconnect between workpce and machine

>capacity robbing

>offset's involved going from sled to no sled....from a tool setting height standpoint.BW


----------



## woodnthings (Jan 24, 2009)

*Agreed and thanks BW*

Barring any further suggestions, changes, criticisms, or other input I've pretty much finalized the sled design/concept with the addition of a brace across the connector board. It's very stiff now and still moves with very little effort. A stainless 6" rule did not bend appreciably when used to push the unit, minus the workpiece of course. One great feature of the sled is you have the kerf visible at all times to determine where your cut will be., no guesswork or trial cuts. Just line up on the good side of your mark and away you go.
 bill


----------



## tcleve4911 (Dec 16, 2006)

Nevermind those nea-sayers, Bill....

I love It!!!
I need to go get another table saw.......:shifty:


----------



## AlWood (Apr 18, 2010)

woodnthings said:


> Barring any further suggestions, changes, criticisms, or other input I've pretty much finalized the sled design/concept with the addition of a brace across the connector board. It's very stiff now and still moves with very little effort. A stainless 6" rule did not bend appreciably when used to push the unit, minus the workpiece of course. One great feature of the sled is you have the kerf visible at all times to determine where your cut will be., no guesswork or trial cuts. Just line up on the good side of your mark and away you go.
> bill


Now, Bill, -- with the enforcing brace, this is real nice!:thumbsup: Still, not quite sure about angular stability when one crosscuts a long board (didn't work on my TS), but then again, as you stated, it was not your intention or preferred mode of operation. Anyway, with your airport-size table saw, you can put in THREE (or more:yes miter gauges and shame off all the pesky critics!:laughing:


----------



## haugerm (Nov 19, 2009)

Hey, I really like that with the brace. I think I'll make one. I've been wanting a crosscut sled lately, but honestly I haven't made one because I really don't know where I'd store it. Yep, it's sad but I'm down to counting inches in my shop space. I think if I make it with some 23/32 ply scraps I have it'll be stiff enough for anything I'd need. Thanks for the idea.
--Matt


----------



## yocalif (Nov 11, 2010)

Not sure why the question mark on using dual or more miter slots, I have several jigs that use both of my miter slots. Of course the slots NOT on the table with the cutting blade need to be parallel to those on the table with the cutting blade, but that is common knowledge, and I am sure you went to great lengths to make it so.

Ok I will go out and buy me a 6'x4"x1" hard wood and another for strengthener. Now I just need someone to give a 2nd free 22114 Craftsman TS, and I am good to go. :yes:

4WIW, I appreciate those who share their ideas and take the time to post pics, thanks a lot woodnthings.

I also appreciate those who ask good questions and make us all think, that is why forums are a great place to learn things.


----------



## 3fingers (Dec 7, 2011)

I know this is an old post but like the saw set up. My uncles shop we had two saws set up on two ends of the workbench. Very useful! 

Do u have two fences to make different cuts?


----------



## woodnthings (Jan 24, 2009)

*shhhh there are*

really 3 saws, 2 tables from other saws and a router table extension....shhh. People will think I'm off my rocker. Actually I am. I don't have a rocker...yet. I can still get out of the recliner though.
Actually have 3 fences also, 2 regular, one sacrificial for using with the dado head. It's all good if you have the space. It is a long walk around to the back of the saw for the off falls.  bill


----------



## 3fingers (Dec 7, 2011)

Can u post pics for me I love the set up of wt I saw.


----------



## woodnthings (Jan 24, 2009)

*My Photos has it*

http://www.woodworkingtalk.com/members/woodnthings-7194/albums/triple-12-craftsman-table-saw/  bill


----------



## Texas Sawduster (Apr 27, 2009)

*I Like it.*



woodnthings said:


> Barring any further suggestions, changes, criticisms, or other input I've pretty much finalized the sled design/concept with the addition of a brace across the connector board. It's very stiff now and still moves with very little effort. A stainless 6" rule did not bend appreciably when used to push the unit, minus the workpiece of course. One great feature of the sled is you have the kerf visible at all times to determine where your cut will be., no guesswork or trial cuts. Just line up on the good side of your mark and away you go.
> bill


Keep up the great work. Love that twin miter gage idea.


----------



## Pirate (Jul 23, 2009)

If you put a base on it like most sleds, you would increase your crosscut capacity.


----------



## woodnthings (Jan 24, 2009)

*how so?*



Pirate said:


> If you put a base on it like most sleds, you would increase your crosscut capacity.


I don't see how, I can only pull it so far out towards me until it falls off of the saw. It would be the same with a base and a base just adds weight and decreases cutting capacity. More simple is more better. 
If I need to crosscut a 30" panel I'll just use the fence or a panel saw.  bill


----------



## Pirate (Jul 23, 2009)

woodnthings said:


> I don't see how, I can only pull it so far out towards me until it fall out of the saw. It would be the same with a base and a base just adds weight and decreases cutting capacity. More simple is more better.
> If I need to crosscut a 30" panel I'll just use the fence or a panel saw.  bill


If you put a 3/4" thick base on it, would it not, increase the distance, between the fence, and blade tooth contact?


----------



## Texas Sawduster (Apr 27, 2009)

*Miter Gages*



Pirate said:


> If you put a 3/4" thick base on it, would it not, increase the distance, between the fence, and blade tooth contact?


I believe that He is refering to the Miter Gages coming out of the t slots when it is moved away from the blade. The runners on those gages are not that long and will come out if pulled far enough back.
That would cause you to lose all of your stability in regards to the gages being parallel with the blade.


----------



## woodnthings (Jan 24, 2009)

*and the consensus is...?*



Pirate said:


> If you put a base on it like most sleds, you would increase your crosscut capacity.





woodnthings said:


> I don't see how, I can only pull it so far out towards me until it falls off of the saw. It would be the same with a base and a base just adds weight and decreases cutting capacity. More simple is more better.
> If I need to crosscut a 30" panel I'll just use the fence or a panel saw.  bill





Pirate said:


> If you put a 3/4" thick base on it, would it not, increase the distance, between the fence, and blade tooth contact?


Maybe by 3/8" or 1/2" or so, but what's the advantage over the drawbacks ...added weight, less capapcity?



Texas Sawduster said:


> I believe that He is refering to the Miter Gages coming out of the t slots when it is moved away from the blade. Th*e runners on those gages are not that long and will come out if pulled far enough back.*
> That would cause you to lose all of your stability in regards to the gages being parallel with the blade.


A base longer than the runners would serve no purpose that I can determine, since when the runners come back out of the slots, you lose control as suggested above. Maybe I'm not gittin' it, I donno? I'm not sayin' this is the end all-be all sled, just a way to make pretty darn square cross cuts with a minimum of hardware, if you have a pair of matching miter gauges on hand.

A much wider/deeper sled that will crosscut 30" panels would be better for someone who makes those cuts frequently. When I run out of crosscut capacity using the miter gauges, I just depend on the fence and having at least 1 square corner... not always possible, I know.  bill


----------



## H. A. S. (Sep 23, 2010)

cabinetman said:


> Why are you defensive...I asked a simple question. I asked what keeps them tandem, which in my mind means both gauges would have to be rigidly connected. So, are you saying that you just push one gauge and the other moves in perfect sequence?
> 
> For one reason or another, if one gauge does not travel (in tandem) it puts the cut at risk by some angular movement (even so slightly). This could cause a binding and a catch (possibly kickback), which with a long board, or any length utilizing the two gauges, could be risky.
> 
> ...





...........................................................................:huh::shifty:


----------



## woodnthings (Jan 24, 2009)

H. A. S. said:


> ...........................................................................:huh::shifty:


You just stirrin' the pot here?................................................:shifty:


----------



## H. A. S. (Sep 23, 2010)

I am somewhat an industrial expert on safety, seen a bunch of bad accidents; and there is nothing unsafe about your set up. If your saw is unsafe, then everyone elses saw is unsafe.

The dude just gets carried away when you post these things/methods. Needs to take a chill pill, after all it is Christmas.:laughing:
Don't get me started on the benefits of pocket screws.


----------

