Henry Taylor "bowl buster" gouge

[Odie]

Click:
http://www.woodturnerscatalog.com/s...lor_Bowl_Buster_Gouge___htt_bowl_buster?Args=

I thought I'd try out this 3/4" dia extra long gouge just to check it out. I've found that it speeds up my roughing of the interior of a bowl quite a bit. I might try the 1" dia gouge next.....just to experiment with it.

This gouge came unhandled. I put on a short handle, but it still is too long for my Wolverine. I had to make up a new longer Wolverine attachment.....just so I could sharpen the darn thing!

The bowl you see here is 4x10 Maple, and I roughed the interior in less than 5 minutes! That's pretty darn fast.....and probably twice as fast as my usual 1/2" deep flute bowl gouge. I did a 6x15 with it the other day.....and it was a pleasure to use.

Would I buy this gouge again????? I might not, but instead I might buy that 1" version to try out. Anyway, this one is mine now, and I can see myself using it quite a bit for the next few years......especially for the larger bowls, because it certainly is a nice handling gouge on the big bowls.

otis of cologne

 

[GeorgeH]

Can't see myself spending that kind of money on a tool that, although probably slightly improved, costs twice what I might pay for a very good competitive gouge when I can buy two of the "lesser" designs.

 

[Ed Koenig]

Click:
http://www.woodturnerscatalog.com/s...lor_Bowl_Buster_Gouge___htt_bowl_buster?Args=

I thought I'd try out this 3/4" dia extra long gouge just to check it out. I've found that it speeds up my roughing of the interior of a bowl quite a bit. I might try the 1" dia gouge next.....just to experiment with it.

This gouge came unhandled. I put on a short handle, but it still is too long for my Wolverine. I had to make up a new longer Wolverine attachment.....just so I could sharpen the darn thing!

The bowl you see here is 4x10 Maple, and I roughed the interior in less than 5 minutes! That's pretty darn fast.....and probably twice as fast as my usual 1/2" deep flute bowl gouge. I did a 6x15 with it the other day.....and it was a pleasure to use.

Would I buy this gouge again????? I might not, but instead I might buy that 1" version to try out. Anyway, this one is mine now, and I can see myself using it quite a bit for the next few years......especially for the larger bowls, because it certainly is a nice handling gouge on the big bowls.

otis of cologne

Otis,

That gouge is intended for use on deep bowls where you are extending the tool far over the tool rest.

Why are you sharpening that tool like a ruffing gouge? Why not use the vari-grind jig and create a fingernail grind?

It seems to me you are defeating the purpose of the tool by using such a short handle on such a massive tool. If it won't fit in the vari-grind jig you own, buy the next size which will accept gouges from 1/2" to 1-1/8" http://www.oneway.ca/sharpening/vari-grind.htm or you could sharpen it freehand.

Ed

 

[Odie]

Otis,

That gouge is intended for use on deep bowls where you are extending the tool far over the tool rest.

Why are you sharpening that tool like a ruffing gouge? Why not use the vari-grind jig and create a fingernail grind?

It seems to me you are defeating the purpose of the tool by using such a short handle on such a massive tool. If it won't fit in the vari-grind jig you own, buy the next size which will accept gouges from 1/2" to 1-1/8" http://www.oneway.ca/sharpening/vari-grind.htm or you could sharpen it freehand.

Ed

Ed......

I wanted to go a size larger. At this point, I sort of wish I'd have spent a few more bucks and got the larger size diameter gouge yet.

Because I've found this is the best grind for safely removing wood fast from the interior of bowls......better known as roughing. This is where I use this grind. For exterior cuts, I do use the vari-grind jig on other gouges.

Not defeating anything......just using it as I intend to use it, and it works well for my purposes.

If you don't agree with the way I do things.....fine. I do a lot of things differently than the main stream turners do. This is a part of why I sometimes discover things that others don't.

Just sharing my experiences.

otis of cologne

 

[MichaelMouse]

I've got a 1" A2 Serious gouge, and he's heavy. Can't see my arm benefiting much from anything longer, especially as the name of the game is to get the fulcrum as close to the work as possible.

He doesn't see much use, really, since the rougher is faster outside, and the old 5/8 Sorby sits closer to hand than he on the rack. He's become another tool recommended by others that didn't work out for me. He's a modified V groove too, which makes him prone to folding and retaining shavings in the flute rather than curling and ejecting them. Timed myself during one roughing session on a few production pieces because George mentioned the time to core, and it came out seven to ten. Don't know how much I could shave off of that with a bigger gouge, as it represents less than one third of the log to rack time anyway.

I have seen lots of the long tools on the racks at the few turning places I actually visited, though I had always assumed it was because people didn't buy them.

 

[robo hippy]

Personally, I prefer a big scraper (3/8 by 1 1/2) for my roughing and shaping, then use the gouge for the final cuts. Time from start to finish on a 8 by 3 inch bowl, just under 5 minutes. Generally when roughing, you are using a scraping cut anyway, and what better tool to do that with than a scraper?
robo hippy

 

[john lucas]

I have a 1" gouge ground like yours. I don't like it. I can remove wood faster with my 5/8" gouge with sort of an Irish or Ellsworth grind. Using the wings and front edge I can take cuts as big as I can control. I can also go right from roughing to final cuts without changing tools.
Not chastising your method it simply doesn't work for me.
If you watch Mike Mahoney's videos you can see how to remove wood very quickly with a gouge shaped like mine

 

[Gordon Seto]

Odie,

Judging from the shaving you have in the picture you posted, I don't think this gouge is effective at all.
The first picture was Doug Thompson doing the cowboy hat demo. He was using the 5/8" V Thompson Tools (Of course). You can see the long and wide shaving he threw in the picture, all over in the back ground.
The second picture was Bill Grumbine doing a demo for our Club (NCWT) couple weeks ago; he was holding the rough cut shaving on his left hand and the fine shaving on his right. He was also using a side grind 5/8" Thompson V bowl gouge. With the one gouge, same grind, he finished several projects. He didn't even use his famous 80 grit gouge.
I would say, the Thompson tools are better steel, better value.

Gordon

 

[Odie]

Odie,

Judging from the shaving you have in the picture you posted, I don't think this gouge is effective at all.
The first picture was Doug Thompson doing the cowboy hat demo. He was using the 5/8" V Thompson Tools (Of course). You can see the long and wide shaving he threw in the picture, all over in the back ground.
The second picture was Bill Grumbine doing a demo for our Club (NCWT) couple weeks ago; he was holding the rough cut shaving on his left hand and the fine shaving on his right. He was also using a side grind 5/8" Thompson V bowl gouge. With the one gouge, same grind, he finished several projects. He didn't even use his famous 80 grit gouge.
I would say, the Thompson tools are better steel, better value.

Gordon

Judging from the shaving.....? Why?

This isn't the purpose of roughing out a bowl. My purpose is simply speed and ease of making the cut in preparation for drying with a minimum of tear-out, nothing more......and nothing more is needed.

This bowl gouge does exactly that, and does it nicely! (For me! )

Now, if we are talking final cuts, the appearance of the shaving will make a difference.

===========================

To all.......

This thread certainly is an expose' on the individuality of woodturning.....wouldn't you say?

No matter what the subject, there seldom seems to be universal agreement on the best methods we decide on to apply.

Even so, I'm one who is unimpressed with universal agreement anyway. Universal agreement isn't where innovation gets traction. Unless it involves great expense, I usually try to apply with practical application all points of view.....then decide what works best for me. I think this is what many of you also do.....that is, if your work is an extension of your own creativity....and your ultimate purpose isn't to impress other woodturners. I do make an attempt to impress those who are likely to take money out of their pockets and purchase my bowls.....and I'm having some amount of success there.

One thing you should all realize.......When I give opinions and share my experiences and ways of doing things, it's not my purpose to tell you my ways of thinking and doing things should be yours too. All I'm doing is sharing......nothing more.

Like I've said many times, I've been turning for close to 25yrs now....very seriously for about a dozen years. Up until about a year ago, I had NEVER even spoken to another turner! My ways of doing many things are far from what is thought of as "main stream", or what is being taught these days.

I also, as a result of speaking with some of the wonderful people on this forum, alter my ways of doing things from time to time. I think of myself as very open minded, but will not alter my course without considering how input from others apply to my ways of doing things, needs, wants, desires, thoughts on design, art principle, etc.

A good example of this is a previous thread on chucks vs faceplates. I've been using faceplates as my standard S.O.P. since the very beginning.....using my Stronghold chuck only occasionally. As a result of some of the input from you on this forum, I'm now using my chucks much more often. It seems to me that some of you seldom use, or never use faceplates as a method of mounting from start to final finish......I think that's a shame, because there are advantages to faceplates that chucks can't match.....but, you've convinced me that the opposite is also true.....and I've become a "convert"!

That's only one example......I'm thankful to finally be communicating with other turners......but, I find, as you do, that I'm often in disagreement with those who post here. None of us should be surprised about this, either from me, or yourself.....

OK, I guess I've rambled on for long enough. Many of you probably haven't bothered to read this anyway. For those of you that have, thanks for allowing me to express my opinions......once again.

otis of cologne

 

[Steve Worcester]

. Up until about a year ago, I had NEVER even spoken to another turner!

We really need to get you out more!

As far as sharpening on the wolverine, based on how you have it positioned, I am guessing you have a more traditional, straight across grind. With that it is pretty easy to learn to sharpen on the platform without the arm out, and quite a bit safer too.
Depending on the flute shape, you could regrind to a fingernail should you desire. Oneway does make a larger varigrind that will take a gouge up to about an 1 1/8".

 

[Gordon Seto]

Judging from the shaving.....? Why?

Odie,

Thanks for sharing your opinion.

You are talking about the roughing cut and speed. IMO, the wider and thicker the shaving means more wood is removed in each pass, the less passes to accomplish the roughing process. If the shaving is small, the peeling action is less effective and you are working harder. I hope my logic make sense.

Gordon

 

[Odie]

We really need to get you out more!

As far as sharpening on the wolverine, based on how you have it positioned, I am guessing you have a more traditional, straight across grind. With that it is pretty easy to learn to sharpen on the platform without the arm out, and quite a bit safer too.
Depending on the flute shape, you could regrind to a fingernail should you desire. Oneway does make a larger varigrind that will take a gouge up to about an 1 1/8".

Howdy, Steve......

Safer?

Yeah, I'd wholeheartedly agree with that. It sure seems to me that the "fingernail" grind is a lot more susceptible to a severe catch than the "straight" grind......at least, in my hands it seems so. In many, but not all cases, the fingernail grind is the best bet for a great final cut requiring less sanding. For my purposes, the one exception to this is the upper inside of an aggressively inward slanting wall of a bowl.....as long as access is still possible.

The discussion of the different styles of grinds on bowl gouges is lacking in one respect........the physical movements and turning styles of the individual that holds it! One type of grind that I've grown accustomed to using, may not be suitable for someone who won't quite use it in the same way that I do.

BTW: Gordon.......Of course your logic makes sense......How could it not? What I'm not seeing is how that logic is applied to roughing the interior of a bowl. If it took me about 5min to rough out the interior of the bowl in the photo, and I could gain a 10% efficiency advantage in cutting rate......how does that become an advantage that makes making a change in sharpening this gouge worthy of consideration? Does that make any sense?

Thanks everyone........As we have this discussion, I either become more committed to my beliefs......or, less. Either way, I will benefit from the outcome!

otis of cologne

 

[Doug Thompson]

Otis,
This is a good idea for deep hollowing, to hang that over the tool rest 6 inches would take a heck of a handle to counteract the force. For a standard bowl a normal length gouge will do.

For the guy/gals in Texas, Fog Tanners club will have a woodturning event in April. This TEXAS SIZE bowl gouge will be donated for the raffle, it's 1 inch diameter, 13-1/2 inches long V shape flute. Next to it is a 3/4, 5/8, 1/2 and 3/8 gouge.

EDIT, next to this gouge everything else looks so small LoL

 

[MichaelMouse]

Odie,

Thanks for sharing your opinion.

You are talking about the roughing cut and speed. IMO, the wider and thicker the shaving means more wood is removed in each pass, the less passes to accomplish the roughing process. If the shaving is small, the peeling action is less effective and you are working harder. I hope my logic make sense.

Gordon

Only if you qualify it. The wider and thicker shavings removed in one minute at 300 will equal, in volume, the narrower and thinner shavings taken in the same minute at 600, or so it would seem. For example, http://s108.photobucket.com/albums/n28/MichaelMouse/?action=view&current=1012052.flv is at 380. Wouldn't take as much of a bite at twice the speed.

The nature of the shaving depends on what you're doing, too. Inside work at depth is not the same as outside work, simply because you often can't engage as much of the gouge, due to the angles. For example, http://s108.photobucket.com/albums/n28/MichaelMouse/?action=view&current=HollowTwo001.flv is at 680 and inside, but produces nearly an equal volume, until the angles eliminate the broad gouge presentation.

Then there's the turner's forearm to consider. That, in my way of thinking, is the most important part of the equation. The objective is to get the wood off of the shape that's in there in the way that puts the least strain on the turner. Along the way it means least strain on the machine, the tool, and the piece as well, of course. Hippy uses scrapers, which is something I wouldn't, even if I could with the holds I use. Odie likes a gouge so long he could work it from the next room, though he otherwise knows about the shortcomings of long overhang. Celebrities, as you display, use different techniques, while Gordon does what, and why?

 

[Steve Worcester]

Granted, I bought this gouge before Doug was around, but take a look at the amount of surface available on the fingernail ground vs the traditional grind. Not saying there isn't a place for both.
Also, there certainly is a point at which bigger is not better as you won't have enough
a)Motor/torque
b)connection between the wood and faceplate/chuck
c)strength to hold onto the gouge

Both of these gouges are more than an inch in diameter.

 

[Odie]

Howdy Steve.........

I apologize for not getting right back to you on this, but I've been having some medical problems lately......and also, I needed to take this picture to insert to this post.

As you can see, my straight (or traditional) grind has quite a bit more bevel than yours does. My guess is, this is why I'm having better success in using this grind on the interior of bowls than using a shorter traditional bevel. The second pic shows that the gouge is sharpened quite a bit higher than dead center of the wheel than it takes to sharpen the kind of straight grind shown in your picture.

I was unable to sharpen this gouge using the original 27 1/2" long Wolverine jig. I'm also posting a picture of the new jig that I made up......this one is 47" in length, and should be able to handle just about any future "long and strong" gouge I'll ever want to sharpen in the traditional manner.

Keepin on keepin on........turning!

otis of cologne

 

[Odie]

Personally, I prefer a big scraper (3/8 by 1 1/2) for my roughing and shaping, then use the gouge for the final cuts. Time from start to finish on a 8 by 3 inch bowl, just under 5 minutes. Generally when roughing, you are using a scraping cut anyway, and what better tool to do that with than a scraper?
robo hippy

Just wanted to make a quick comment about robo hippy's post......

Often times, I find myself doing what he does......I darn near always bring a bowl blank to round with a heavy scraper. This just seems to work better for me than bringing to round using a gouge.

Once the bowl blank is round and more in balance, I then make decisions on what kind of tools to proceed with for exterior work. Sometimes I stick with the scraper, but the shape of the bowl, and how it's mounted, is what determines that. Certainly, for removing more wood in a single pass, the gouge always gives a better cut with less tearout. Scrapers are capable of making just as fine a cut as the gouge, but you can only remove minute amounts of wood with it in order to match the surface a gouge is capable of.

The interior is different entirely. I cannot ever, in recent times remember not using a gouge for hogging out the interior of a bowl. Generally, the wood closest to the rim is good enough, straight from the gouge, to consider final sanding. The surface near the inside bottom of the bowl, generally, is better off to go to the scraper, before sanding.

Seems the general thinking these days, is to forget about scrapers and concentrate on gouge work. This "gouge worship" is a false religion. Scrapers are every bit as worthy of praise as the gouge......albeit, not as interesting in concept!

otis of cologne