Twin Turbo Vise

[Ronn W]

After watching the videos including the instructional on assembly and mounting, I just pulled the plug on the Twin Turbo vise - 14" model.  It will be fall before I get it. But will definitely do a review.

[Chet]

I was pretty intrigued by these when I saw them.  I'm thinking about getting it as a tail vise set up.  Ronn with this being in the kickstart phase did they already bill your card?

[pkinneb]

That’s pretty sweet and the price seems reasonable too.

[Chestnut]

I really want to pull the trigger as well. I know he said it'll be $50 more but I'd bet it ends up being more than that.

[Tom King]

I like it better than any I've seen so far.  I'd like to have one for a "Moxon", with the handle off to one side, rather than in the middle.

[krtwood]

I've had it for a few months now (I got one of the prototypes to review) and it really is so much better than the Veritas.  I guess the only negative thing I can say about it is there isn't really a lot of need for the slow gear speed.  The fast speed clamps well enough, in combination with that vise liner, that you don't really need the slow speed.  At first I thought I wouldn't really use the fast speed because even the slow speed is faster than the Veritas, but it's the other way around and now I could never go back to how slow the Veritas is.

 

[Tpt life]

Izzy Swan pinky

[Chestnut]

I LOVE that he made the stock face plate acrylic. I really appreciate it when people are willing to take input from their customers. Thanks for linking that video i was going to search for it today.

10 hours ago, Chet said:

I was pretty intrigued by these when I saw them.  I'm thinking about getting it as a tail vise set up.  Ronn with this being in the kickstart phase did they already bill your card? 

All the kick starters I've done charge you up front.

[Mark J]

I like the idea of an end vice much better than the traditional tail vice or wagon vice.  This is a very clever idea and I think it will have inherently less backlash than the chain drive on the Veritas. 

It looks like it is open along the bottom edge of the vice chop so I wonder about dust control.  With a transparent plate instead of steel you could at least see what was going on in the mechanism, but since the mechanism resides inside the vice chop and hence the chop has its middle "chopped" out that steel plate might be needed for stiffness.  

[Chestnut]

19 minutes ago, Mark J said:

I like the idea of an end vice much better than the traditional tail vice or wagon vice.  This is a very clever idea and I think it will have inherently less backlash than the chain drive on the Veritas. 

It looks like it is open along the bottom edge of the vice chop so I wonder about dust control.  With a transparent plate instead of steel you could at least see what was going on in the mechanism, but since the mechanism resides inside the vice chop and hence the chop has its middle "chopped" out that steel plate might be needed for stiffness.  

I'm 99% sure the Andy addressed all of those between his own promotional content and the questions on Friday live. I'll summarize below from what I've caught so far so people don't have to search for the answers.

Dust apparently isn't an issue the same reason that it's not an issue in your table saw on the worm gears. The gears are capable of clearing the dust on their own with out it causing any issues. The gears only need a small amount of dry lubricant and don't attract much dust. The bigger dust issue is on the acme threads and they are suggested to be hit with compressed air to keep them clean and functioning smooth.

The plate that all the stuff mounts to is steel and offers the stiffness the acrylic is just to hold the fronts and Andy tested multiple thicknesses extensively and determined that in the long run no issues would result. I think he's had 5-6 youtube woodworkers testing this for the last few months. I think it's a lot less appealing with the steel face-plate than with the acrylic.

The other main concern was racking and i guess it racks less than the BC leg vise.

[Chet]

3 hours ago, Chestnut said:

I think it's a lot less appealing with the steel face-plate

Unless you are in the Steam Punk crowd. 

 

3 hours ago, Chestnut said:

The other main concern was racking and i guess it racks less than the BC leg vise.

Yea, on Friday live it looked to be zero racking.

[Tpt life]

38 minutes ago, Chet said:

Unless you are in the Steam Punk crowd. 

 

Yea, on Friday live it looked to be zero racking.

Nah, steam punk would warrant bronze. 

[sjeff70]

I've always liked the record vise encased in wood like David Marks has on his bench.  How is the vise you guys are describing better than an inexpensive record vise? 

 

[Chestnut]

1 hour ago, sjeff70 said:

I've always liked the record vise encased in wood like David Marks has on his bench.  How is the vise you guys are describing better than an inexpensive record vise?

Well from first glance the twin turbo is up to 24" jaws. You can put a wider board on the record style vise but you end up exceeding the capabilities of the vise at that point. Ronn can probably elaborate much further but every time i talk to him he mentions his displeasure with how much racking he gets on his woodriver 9" which is very similar to the record 9". The big limitation is how close together the guide bars on that vise with the TT the acme threads are at the far edges which offers far more racking resistance.

Cost is significantly more but i think the added cost rewards some extra benefits that the cheaper record style options don't offer. Notable if you have a the wider TT option it will operate similar to a moxon vise where you can drop a panel in the middle. This is something that i use often. This way you aren't working on the sides of the vice but instead right in the middle. This offers better work holding for tasks like dovetailing sawing ect.

This is also less competing against those options and is more targeted directly at the Veritas twin screw and the Lie Nielsen twin screw. or other twin screw face vises.

[wtnhighlander]

To be clear, you can achieve the same HOLDING abilities with 2 pipe clamps and a board. The twin turbo's big advantage is the fast, one-handed operation.

[Chestnut]

55 minutes ago, wtnhighlander said:

To be clear, you can achieve the same HOLDING abilities with 2 pipe clamps and a board. The twin turbo's big advantage is the fast, one-handed operation.

I don't know so much about that maybe you had better luck. My 2 pipe clamps and a board racks so danged badly  that i can't get any holding power out of it. I have to tighten the screws on the clamps that i damage the work piece before it stops moving around in the vise. Myave adding some cork or something would help that but still the racking vertically is horrendous.

[wtnhighlander]

10 hours ago, Chestnut said:

I don't know so much about that maybe you had better luck. My 2 pipe clamps and a board racks so danged badly  that i can't get any holding power out of it. I have to tighten the screws on the clamps that i damage the work piece before it stops moving around in the vise. Myave adding some cork or something would help that but still the racking vertically is horrendous.

Mine holds well, but the board is a nice, soft piece of SPF from the home center. Almost as grippy as a thick leather liner on hardwood.

Of course, trying to hold anything outside the pipes will make it rack horribly. A spacer on the opposite side takes care of that. But all that comes at the cost of not-so-easy operation in such cases.

[Chestnut]

54 minutes ago, wtnhighlander said:

Of course, trying to hold anything outside the pipes will make it rack horribly. A spacer on the opposite side takes care of that. But all that comes at the cost of not-so-easy operation in such cases.

My board is pine as well, it does grip when you embed the work piece into it but cherry isn't that much harder than the board on my vise so I've had marks at times or it racks so bad that it puts all the pressure on an edge and damages that.

You mean the dance one does when your try and hold a spacer block in the bottom of the vise and their work piece and tighten down one of the screws? Yeah that's a 3 handed operation. Something i haven't figured out yet so i just roll on with out the spacer. Can't beat it for the cost though.

I'm just growing tired of 2nd rate stuff that doesn't work in my life. Most notable the software i have to use on a daily basis that is so sloppily thrown together all it does is cause me endless frustration. If i can eliminate one frustration in my life I'll be happier for it.

[Ronn W]

On 3/20/2019 at 6:55 AM, Chestnut said:

I'm just growing tired of 2nd rate stuff that doesn't work in my life. Most notable the software i have to use on a daily basis that is so sloppily thrown together all it does is cause me endless frustration. If i can eliminate one frustration in my life I'll be happier for it.

Now you just have to figure out who that is.

[danglin]

How would you compare and contrast the twin screw design and Benchcrafted’s crisscross leg vise?  For one thing, the distance from the top of the bench and the screw is deeper with the Crisscross.  Would you expect racking to be any different between the two?  Also, how about using one of the twin screw vises in a tail position vs the BC tail vise?

[Chestnut]

1 hour ago, danglin said:

How would you compare and contrast the twin screw design and Benchcrafted’s crisscross leg vise?  For one thing, the distance from the top of the bench and the screw is deeper with the Crisscross.  Would you expect racking to be any different between the two?  Also, how about using one of the twin screw vises in a tail position vs the BC tail vise?

The leg vise is really a different type of vise meant for different work. They have some overlap but a tall skinny board is more meant to be clamped in the wagon/tail vise. I believe Marc covered the racking of the leg vise and mentioned that the twin screw  performs far better.

Using the twin screw as a wagon/tail vise would operate in a similar fashion but might be a bit more awkward as the wheel is right there for the BC hardware and it's centered on the twin screw. Again not an apples to apples comparison.

The twin screw is a moxon style vise and should compare to vises of that style. The ideal bench would have all three. If you wanted once vise to rule them all I'd probably go with a twin screw. If you get nit picky on performance of each vs each other it's going to become clear that they are all different and that each vise has a spot in your shop.

[SawDustB]

The leg vise really excels when you're working on the edge of a board, or working on something that's entirely within the vise jaws. I do use it for dovetailing larger pieces, but I end up clamping the other side to the dead man. It ends up emulating the twin screw design. I actually got turned off the twin screw design after playing with a Veritas twin screw at a Lee Valley workshop. I found it very clunky and slow. I think this vise design may be one that I actually might have gone for.

[danglin]

I have followed various vise designs over the last two years or so and was under the impression that the crisscross version of the BC leg vise mostly dealt with the racking problem vs the initial iteration with the sliding board and pinboard at the bottom.  I have a nice jointer and planer and don't see myself edge planing a long board, since I have a hybrid approach. If that's the case one of the turbo twin vises may serve my needs for the left front side pf the bench (right-hander).  Thoughts?

[Art]

13 minutes ago, danglin said:

I have followed various vise designs over the last two years or so and was under the impression that the crisscross version of the BC leg vise mostly dealt with the racking problem vs the initial iteration with the sliding board and pinboard at the bottom.  I have a nice jointer and planer and don't see myself edge planing a long board, since I have a hybrid approach. If that's the case one of the turbo twin vises may serve my needs for the left front side pf the bench (right-hander).  Thoughts?

I believe the criss cross design is meant more to avoid having the pinboard in the bottom and address racking along the long axis of the vise, rather than laterally.  The criss cross still racks a fair bit in a left to right direction (as shown by Marc in Friday Live).  As mentioned above, the twin screw is not really meant as a competitor/replacement for a traditional leg vise. 

[danglin]

Help me understand this.  Other than the situation of edge jointing a wider board with the aid of the deadman, why doesn't the twin screw like Klein's design basically replace the functions of the leg vise?  Since I will tend to use a jointer for this operation, what will I miss having the twin turbo vs a BC Crisscross leg vise?  Having to work without such vises in the past doesn't give me the intuitive sense to figure this out.