Question on hunter tools

[Brent Wells]

I was curios if there is a well rounded multi use hunter tool. I have been watching videos and reading about them and a carbide tool might be nice to have. I would mainly be using for boxes, cups, hollow ornaments, maybe stabilized pens ect. Bowls, platters I still like gouges and scrapers, spindle work I like skews and gouges . I was looking at the hunter #5 but the osprey and Hercules both look like the would be useful. I have never had a carbide but now that I am getting more practice and skill I see that there are times they would be useful. I don't have a ton of gouges with different bevels, all are ground the same just different sizes with fingernail so there are times when it will be useful on bowls. It would not be a main tool since I would like to master bowl/ detail gouges . Thank for opinions and info

Brent

 

[Odie]

I was curios if there is a well rounded multi use hunter tool. I have been watching videos and reading about them and a carbide tool might be nice to have. I would mainly be using for boxes, cups, hollow ornaments, maybe stabilized pens ect. Bowls, platters I still like gouges and scrapers, spindle work I like skews and gouges . I was looking at the hunter #5 but the osprey and Hercules both look like the would be useful. I have never had a carbide but now that I am getting more practice and skill I see that there are times they would be useful. I don't have a ton of gouges with different bevels, all are ground the same just different sizes with fingernail so there are times when it will be useful on bowls. It would not be a main tool since I would like to master bowl/ detail gouges . Thank for opinions and info

Brent

Brent.....I've had a #3 swan neck and #4 straight Hunter tools for quite a few years, but have used neither extensively. I generally use them for up under the inside of undercut rims on bowls, where the reach is the most difficult to get at. They do an acceptable job, but I can get to the same place, and do just as good a job, with a specially ground scraper held at a high shear scrape angle just as easily. The Hunter tools are useful, and a good addition to your lathe tools, but do not take the place of more traditional tools, in my opinion. I'm not a real fan of carbide tools, because they can't easily be sharpened.....whereas traditional tools can. I'd suggest anyone who has a mind to get one, or two.....to go ahead and do it......just for the experience of using one.

Depending on the shape you intend to use the carbide tool for, you may be doing other things than I do......but, for my purposes, I've found the straight tool more useful than the swan neck.....mainly because it's more resistant to catching. You can't go around corners as easily with the straight tool, though.

ko

 

[Gerald Lawrence]

Odie is correct in most aspects to me also. But I like the #4 for difficult hollowing and clean up inside. Have used it for complete hollowing, but now know faster methods. Recently got a #5 swan neck and it is great for cleanup in rounded hollow forms or ball shaped bowls. John Lucas will show up later as he has done several Hunter videos and the Hercules really looks good. John will point out that the Hunter is not intended for outside of bowls or HF. Overall I believe them to be good tools , but as I get better with the bowl gouge they have had less use. Also a disadvantage of most carbide tools is that they are very task oriented and do not usually do many multiple tasks like a bowl gouge will.

 

[john lucas]

Yes I like my Hunter tools. I don't use them exclusively because I'm so comfortable with a bowl gouge. However that is slowly changing. I have started using the big Hercules for roughing bowls, especially the ones that are really out of round. Anchoring the Hercules with my left hand as a fulcrum and pivoting the handle in a controlled acrcing bite takes very little effort and I don't feel like I'm fighting it. I switch back and forth between a 5/8" bowl gouge and Hercules and I think the Hercules is winning. It just puts less stress on my shoulder (the one damaged in the motorcycle accident). It is a very all around tool as you'll see in this video but it won't do it all.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vzrLN8SQ8ms
Because of the 30 degree forward tilt of the cutter it handles exactly like the nose of a bowl gouge. That's the good part. It doesn't take much learning curve if you already are good at a bevel rubbing cut with the bowl gouge. Used flat as a scraper it cuts very fast and relatively clean. However because of the forward tilt it's not a do it all tool. I use the #4 or #5 to the bottom of steep bowls and especially boxes. Because the cutter is mounted flat you have effectively an 82 degree front bevel so the tool will cut with a bevel rubbing cut and the handle is almost straight out. Great for shallow deep boxes. With those two tools you can do an awful lot of work. Don't use the #4 or #5 with the cutter flat like a scraper, you will get a good catch. Tilted to the side about 45 degrees in a bevel rubbing cut and you can finish the bottom of a box so it looks like it's been sanded to 600 grit.
I need to make another video showing why these cutters cut so clean. The cutter top is recessed where the screw goes. The inside is polished to a mirror like finish and the cutting edge angle is about 27 degrees. When used as bowl bottoming gouge you have the advantage of an 82 degree front bevel but your cutting the wood with a 27 degree polished edge. That's why they cut so clean.
This video shows using the #4 cutter. about 6;30 into the video it shows how I do box bottoms. I use the #5 mostly now. The cutter is smaller but the shaft is still large and tapered toward the cutter end. It's just a little more versatile than the #4 for what I do but most cuts can be done with either one.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nfp2kvhH6Mo
This video shows the #1 cutter mounted in a Jamieson style captured boring bar only I'm just using the bar hand held. If you need cleaner sides than the scraping action of the Hunter tools then this is the tool to use. The tilted back cutting angle gives a bevel rubbing cut. I find that most of the time using the Hunter #4 or #5 in a shear scraping angle will clean up the insides that take little sanding. On some wood you still get tearout so I use the #1 cutter or one of the Hunter Back cutting tools.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0v7-HMuCvvM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FFW5ODChWkI

 

[Brent Wells]

Odie, Gerald, John thanks for feed back and info very much appreciated. Like you all stated I like my bowl gouges and my 3/8 sorby is my do anything tool. I tried an easy wood at wood craft but was not impressed. Watching johns videos and hearing the seasoned turners at the club mention hunters tools make me want to give them a shot, and who couldn't use an extra tool or three.

Brent

 

[Max Monts]

Not all carbide tools are similar

The Hunter tools carbide cutters are in fact, cutters. They have an extremely sharp 'lip' on them that makes all the difference in performance when comparing to any EW-type carbide insert - which are (very sharp) scrapers. I learned to use gouges, got a few EW tools when they first appeared when I was able to use one and met Craig at Indy WoodWorking Shows. It was a different tool/approach than I was used to, and I was still looking for "THE TOOL", and I got a couple. I use(d) the square tool to turn bowls from gnarly, barky, woods. The round inserts were/are good at relieving the inner upper surfaces when undercutting a bowl's rim and for the transition area at bottom of bowls' walls and bottoms. Fast forward a few years, and I got a Hunter #2 after reading about them here and other forums. I spoke to Mike Hunter re: the differences in all tools and their uses, and now own a few of these critters, as well. They cut in a similar manner to a gouge (see John Lucas's vids) and need less sanding than other methods (esp. in end-grain). YMMV, of course...
I now know there is no 'holy grail' tool (right?) and enjoy knowing the subtle differences between the various tools when using them in all the various woods here in the mid-west. To me, cutting, and then scraping (sometimes) is a far more satisfying journey than sanding wood into submission w/ the 60 grit 'gouge'. AND, takes less time, overall. Course, it took me a dozen years (and counting) to figure it out...

 

[Odie]

The Hunter tools carbide cutters are in fact, cutters. They have an extremely sharp 'lip' on them that makes all the difference in performance when comparing to any EW-type carbide insert - which are (very sharp) scrapers. I learned to use gouges, got a few EW tools when they first appeared when I was able to use one and met Craig at Indy WoodWorking Shows. It was a different tool/approach than I was used to, and I was still looking for "THE TOOL", and I got a couple. I use(d) the square tool to turn bowls from gnarly, barky, woods. The round inserts were/are good at relieving the inner upper surfaces when undercutting a bowl's rim and for the transition area at bottom of bowls' walls and bottoms. Fast forward a few years, and I got a Hunter #2 after reading about them here and other forums. I spoke to Mike Hunter re: the differences in all tools and their uses, and now own a few of these critters, as well. They cut in a similar manner to a gouge (see John Lucas's vids) and need less sanding than other methods (esp. in end-grain). YMMV, of course...
I now know there is no 'holy grail' tool (right?) and enjoy knowing the subtle differences between the various tools when using them in all the various woods here in the mid-west. To me, cutting, and then scraping (sometimes) is a far more satisfying journey than sanding wood into submission w/ the 60 grit 'gouge'. AND, takes less time, overall. Course, it took me a dozen years (and counting) to figure it out...

Interesting way of looking at things, Max.....

The only thing that matters is the results we individuals are able to attain......nothing, but nothing else matters, because we can discuss theory and application of tools, methods, and individuality until next week, but the results we do achieve clearly expose the validity of the hypothesis. (Your understanding of the need to eliminate sanding is spot on, and many turners rely too much on sanding to clean up the results of what their abilities and tools can't, or don't accomplish.) In the world of theorem by method of imagination, often times the reality of the physical world gets in the way of achieving the best results. We can, and do see differences in performance related to the differences in all the lathe tools that exist, or we can conceive. Realizing these things, and how it applies to our own individuality is not the solution, but merely as step in a process of becoming the best we can be.

ko

 

[hockenbery]

Results are certainly important.

I would argue that turning safely and efficiently are important as well.

I have seen some exceptional bowls that were never on the lathe.
Bowls made with a chainsaw and carving tools. Bowls made with bandsaws and carving tools.
When a bowl is finished and on the shelf no one really knows how it was made.

I believe good tool work that requires little sanding is the mark of good turner.
Speed is the mark of a good turner.
Speed and good tool work are hard to,beat. The efficiency of tool use..

One of the great aspects of going to a national or regional symposium is seeing how folks do the same thing differently.

If two people turn a 10" bowl that is nicely done. Both can be proud.
If one person takes 5 hours and the other takes an hour,
I would suggest the person who takes 5 hours might have some areas to improve upon.

Al

 

[john lucas]

I use to photograph for Brad Sells. His early work looked somewhat like the Madrone warped bowls. About 1/4" thick through out and perfectly sanded and finished. All done with a chainsaw, then an angle grinder, and then sometimes as low as 24 grit paper up to 600 grit. Spectacular work. So as Al said, it's the final product, not how you get there.
http://bradsells.com/

 

[Odie]

I use to photograph for Brad Sells. His early work looked somewhat like the Madrone warped bowls. About 1/4" thick through out and perfectly sanded and finished. All done with a chainsaw, then an angle grinder, and then sometimes as low as 24 grit paper up to 600 grit. Spectacular work. So as Al said, it's the final product, not how you get there.
http://bradsells.com/

Gonna have to disagree with the assumption that excessive sanding is a standard worthy of praise......

Geometric perfection is what enables fine detail grooves with little variance throughout the circumference, and intersecting surfaces that result in crisp corners throughout the circumference. These things result in aesthetic eye appeal that can be had no other way than pursuing geometric perfection through the bare minimum of sanding. The only thing that will enable a bare minimum of sanding, is mastering tool techniques and tool preparation that results in a surface that requires less of it.

An undeniable basic truth about sanding a bowl, is it will remove more material from the long grain than it does the end grain. The more sanding that is required, the further from geometric perfection a bowl will become. The further the variance from a perfect geometric shape, the greater the loss of subliminal clarity, or aesthetic appeal there will be.......unless, of course, one dispenses with attempting these details, in the first place.

Another basic truth, is geometric perfection is an absolute impossibility......but, the closer to that a turner can get, the greater the aesthetic appeal of the details will be.

ko

 

[Gerald Lawrence]

Gonna have to disagree with the assumption that excessive sanding is a standard worthy of praise......

Geometric perfection is what enables fine detail grooves with little variance throughout the circumference, and intersecting surfaces that result in crisp corners throughout the circumference. These things result in aesthetic eye appeal that can be had no other way than pursuing geometric perfection through the bare minimum of sanding. The only thing that will enable a bare minimum of sanding, is mastering tool techniques and tool preparation that results in a surface that requires less of it.

An undeniable basic truth about sanding a bowl, is it will remove more material from the long grain than it does the end grain. The more sanding that is required, the further from geometric perfection a bowl will become. The further the variance from a perfect geometric shape, the greater the loss of subliminal clarity, or aesthetic appeal there will be.......unless, of course, one dispenses with attempting these details, in the first place.

Another basic truth, is geometric perfection is an absolute impossibility......but, the closer to that a turner can get, the greater the aesthetic appeal of the details will be.

ko

All I can say is beauty is in the eye of the beholder and not in what others say we should appreciate in form, shape and decoration.

 

[Odie]

All I can say is beauty is in the eye of the beholder and not in what others say we should appreciate in form, shape and decoration.

Hello Gerald......

I always allow for others to maintain opinions that are not the same as mine. I only speak for myself, as applied to my own turning.

If you disagree with anything I've stated in the post you quoted, you are welcome to your beliefs. 🙂

ko

 

[hockenbery]

I have found the hunter to be excellent for finishing the inside of goblet cups.
These need little sanding.

For flats, sharp angles, and coves on the outsides of bowls I have used the scraper I learned from Al Stirt.
It is a square end scraper sharpened with a gentle radius, It is used at an angle to make a shear scrape. Gets into corners well and does not round sharp edges.
It can also be used to cut a serious of coves on the outside of a bowl. These need little of no sanding makes a nice feature and feels nice to hold.

It would seem to me that the Hunter would cut coves well and leave a terrific surface.
On my list of things to try.

Al

 

[john lucas]

Well Brad can teach you a lot about sanding. His bowls and sculptured don't have the summer winter wood sanding defects that most people who start sanding where he does create. He is a master. I think he uses fairly stiff discs at first. His pieces have to be touched as well as viewed to really appreciate them. He's not above using a hand held carving tool if necessary to get the shapes he wants. He is also developing a carbide carving cutter that is safer than the other ones on the market. Haven't talked to him lately to see how he's coming on that project.
If you want to see how good he is with a chainsaw go look at his furniture. Especially the table. The top was roughed out using the chain saw and then smoothed out with angle grinders. Most people I know could not do that and would end up with a lumpy surface.
http://bradsells.com/portfolio/furniture/22-portfolio/furniture-galleries/43-geode-table

 

[Gerald Lawrence]

Hello Gerald......

I always allow for others to maintain opinions that are not the same as mine. I only speak for myself, as applied to my own turning.

If you disagree with anything I've stated in the post you quoted, you are welcome to your beliefs. 🙂

ko

Well Odie I did not mean offense , but I do disagree. All the Gru's state this form or that look . If you as a turner or a buyer like it then so be it. If you are striving for a certain "look" then more power to it and if you read my statement again I think that is what I said in fewer words.

 

[Odie]

Well Odie I did not mean offense , but I do disagree. All the Gru's state this form or that look . If you as a turner or a buyer like it then so be it. If you are striving for a certain "look" then more power to it and if you read my statement again I think that is what I said in fewer words.

Good enough for me, Gerald! 🙂

Have a good day! (.....or, evening, as it happens to be!) 😛

ko