DW621 in BT3100

[Matthew Knerr]

I know this isn't the best option for table routing, but it's what I have, and there are other tools I could use more than a dedicated table router. My question is, is anyone using their DW621 in the BT3x or in a table in general? How well does it work, andwhat did you have to do to make it work best? If you don't have the 621, but just know, that's fine too! I've seen the Router Raizer and like that, but I could get a very usable fixed base for the price of that.
Also, does anyone have the manual for the DW621 in digital format? It's missing on the Dewalt website. I bought mine at a pawnshop (for $85) and the manual was not included.
Thanks,
Matt

[RickLab]

I don't have one, but you can get Pat Warner's take on it here:

[RickLab]

Amazon has a manual on this page but it's large because it's in so many languages.

[LarryG]

Rick beat me to exactly what I was going to say: that router guru Pat Warner pooh-poohs using ANY plunge router in a table. I am inclined to agree unless you have some sort of above-table adjuster -- which, as you point out, can cost almost as much as a whole 'nother router.

The opening in the BT's accessory table is too small for big panel raising bits, so if you can live without variable speed and soft-start, before spending $90 on a Router Raizer or similar I'd grab myself a nice, basic workhorse like the Porter-Cable 690 ($99 at Lowe's) or, if you can find one, the Ryobi three-base kit at the $87 closeout price.

[Matthew Knerr]

Thanks for the link to the manual, Rick.
I had read the Pat's write-up and agree that the best answer would be a dedicated router, but I'm just getting started, and think I'd get more use out of a drill press or belt/disc sander than an extra router. That's why I'm really interested in getting it to work in the table, for now at least. Thanks for the input you two.
Matt

[RickLab]

Matt, You're certainly welcome - hope that helps!

Larry, I'd have to add to your statement that SOME plunge routers work well in a table. I have the Hitachi M12V in my BT3100 and think it's a good option for anyone that doesn't want to spend the additional money on router lifts, etc. The reason this works better than a DW621 is that the Hitachi has the "up stop" and came with a fine adjustment knob that hangs down below the router when inverted. I took out the plunge springs and don't ever actually plunge it but use the fine adjusment knob to raise it gradually. I just have to barely reach under the BT to do this and it seems OK to me. You and a lot of others on here know a lot more about this stuff than I do so if we disagree I'm probably missing something. If I AM missing something please clue me in because I plan on eventually building a larger router table and moving the Hitachi to it so I'd like to know beforehand. So far what I think is that a router lift would make the setup "slicker" but not really any better than what I have - I just wouldn't be bending down as much.

Your thoughts?

Matt, sorry if I'm stealing your thread but I think you'll want this answer too - whatever it may be.

[LarryG]

Rick, I'm just one guy, with one opinion -- and you know what those are like. [:0] Still, FWIW, here goes.

First of all, my phrase "above-table adjuster" was a flat-footed mistake. My new lift adjusts from above the table and I guess I was thinking of it when I wrote those words the other day. I should have just said "height adjuster." You're correct, it does NOT have to be above the table so long as it works and is reasonably convenient.

Now then ... what follows comes from a combination of my own experience and a **** of a lot of reading and navel-contemplating, and I'll warn you right now that it's going to be stupid-long:

No router is ideal for table use; they all have drawbacks. With fixed-base routers the two main ones are (1) the bit centerline is rarely concentric with the base centerline, so that changing the cutting height when making multiple passes will cause the bit to move laterally as well as vertically; and (2) releasing the base clamp in order to adjust the height will allow the motor to try to fall out of the base (gravity being a hard habit to shake off), making accurately setting the desired height more difficult. With plunge routers, the two main drawbacks are (1) a plunge mechanism by its very nature has more "slop" than a fixed base (which, when locked down, tends to at least be VERY rigid even if it's not exactly where you want it) and this also allows the bit to move around, but in a different way; and (2) unless you have the previously-discussed height adjuster, the cutting height can be difficult to adjust because you're always fighting the springs, often in the awkward confines of the area below the table.

Problem #1 has the same result for both base types: the cut does not end up exactly where you intended. But IMO the plunge base comes off worse because the free play in the plunge mechanism allows the bit to move around while you're actually making the cut. With a fixed base, the bit may shift laterally when you change the cutting height but once the base clamp is locked down, it stays in its new position. That position may be wrong, relative to the previous position, but at least it's constant. Not so with the plunge router, where the bit can and will move around at any time. You really don't want that happening ever, but for safety reasons you especially don't want it happening when you're swinging a big, heavy bit like a panel-raiser or lock-miter bit -- and that's ironic, because it is with such bits in mind that so many guys buy the big powerful plunge routers in the first place. And if at this point you're wondering whether the few thousandths of an inch a bit might be able to move is really that big a deal, remember that you're talking about a hunk of steel and carbide spinning at 10,000 RPM or more, with tip speeds as high as 200MPH. Even if you can set the safety concerns aside, forces like these are going to play **** with your router's motor bearings.

Problem #2 also has the same result for both base types: accurately setting the bit height with the router hanging under the table can be a real PITA. (Both are more easily adjusted if you pop the router up out of the table, ala The Rosendahls on "The Router Workshop," but this is not possible with a fence clamped across a drop-in insert plate, nor with the bolted mount on a BT's accessory table.) One "solution" for the fixed base is to keep trying until you get it right (we'll explore other solutions in a minute). With the plunger, you can add some sort of height adjuster, and/or remove the springs, although this last makes the plunger no good for handheld use. Of course this is not an issue if you will only use the plunge router in a table -- but if that's your plan, why buy a plunger? The whole point of a plunge router is so you can make "inside" cuts, like stopped dados and drilling holes. In terms of the actual cutting operation, putting a plunge router in a table is pointless since 99.99% of table work involves "outside" cuts -- which is where a fixed-base excels. So why not just get a fixed base?

"Because of Problem #1," you might say, pointing out that the fixed-base has its own flavor of bit-positioning problem, and you'd be partly correct. But only partly, because while both types of bases have the bit-moves-around-laterally problem, this can be overcome on the fixed base, either by getting a lift or by using a stack of removable risers to effectively change the cutting height for each pass. With either of these methods, the bit's lateral position never changes; either the whole router goes up and down in the lift, or the stock goes up and down via the stack of risers. But with the plunge base, the problem cannot be corrected. The free play in the plunge mechanism will always be there, no matter what you do.

Or:

"Because of Problem #2," you might say, pointing out that height adjusters for plunge routers are a lot cheaper than router lifts, and on that point you'd be entirely correct. My comeback to this is that the cost of a height adjuster makes a good down payment on a lift, which in the long run is a better, safer, more precise solution; and as a bonus, putting a motor from a fixed-base router in a lift will always (as far as I know) allow you to make above-table bit changes. Sometimes you can do this with a plunge lift, too, but you usually need either special offset wrenches or a collet extender ... again, more money that could be applied toward a lift.

Or you could do as Pat Warner rather militantly recommends, and do away with not only the lift but also the insert plate too, by simply bolting your fixed-base router's base to the underside of a table with a hole cut in it, and then using a stack of risers to control the depth of cut on the various passes. Before buying my lift, I gave this approach some deep thought, and probably would've done it -- after all, it's the cheapest way out of all -- if I did not already have a router table with an insert hole cut through its top.

What all this boils down to is this: plunge routers are mainly used in tables for two reasons, one being that most of the relatively inexpensive 3+HP routers capable of driving large bits happen to be plunge routers, the other that since plunge routers already go up and down it's cheap and easy to add height adjusters to them. IMO those are not sufficient reasons to offset the inherent problem of that big hulking bit not being held as firmly in one place as it really needs to be.

But ...

Understand that we're splitting some awfully, awfully fine frog hairs here. There are tens of thousands of guys successfully using plunge routers in tables, including using them to turn the biggest bits sold, without incident (the moving-bit problem is more a safety issue than a precision-of-cut or motor-longevity issue). Still, IMO if a guy is going out to buy a router for dedicated table use, he ought to bring home a fixed-base model because it, again IMO, has fewer of the various evils the two base types both have. That's basically all I'm saying: if you don't already have a table router, get a fixed-base. But I would not say that it's a terrible, inexcusable, shame-on-you mistake to use a plunge router in a table if that's what one already has.

WHEW! Well, you did ask for my thoughts -- next time, you'll know better! Does all that help? I'll be glad to elaborate, if there's any point on which I'm not clear. Just remember: fine frog hairs ... just one guy's opinion ...

[RickLab]

WOW, that was a lot to take all in - in fact I guess I better print it! I know I asked for your thoughts and I was really hoping you would answer, so I have no regret that it was long. I really appreciate it, and I'm sure it will be a huge help to lots of others reading it. Maybe you will keep someone from buying a plunger just for table use.

In fact, I didn't INTEND to buy it for that - it is highly recommended on this site as you know, and IS a nice router for the money; but when I got it I was like "I'm not holding this thing in my hands and plunge routing with it - it's too big" so it found a home in the BT router table and so far works flawlessly. I have to admit I haven't tried any really large bits with it, and of course they wouldn't fit in the table opening anyway.

I will go home tonight and see how much movement I actually have in my router because it seems pretty stiff to me. I assume you mean because only one plunge tube locks in place that the router could move.

Seriously, thanks for all the great info and your thoughts on the matter.

[LarryG]

quote:Originally posted by RickLab

Maybe you will keep someone from buying a plunger just for table use.

Believe it or not, that's not my intent. Fine frog hairs, etc. If I'm trying to accomplish anything at all, it'd be to get people to slow down and think it all the way through rather than automatically following the herd. (I don't mean that to be as nasty as it probably sounds.)

I do understand that economics is a powerful element, especially for those who are able to use their tools only a handful of hours per week, if that, and purely for hobbyist reasons. I am fortunate enough to spend more hours in the shop on any given weekend than some guys might log in a whole month. Also, I have vague plans of trying to actually make a little money off my sawdust-making someday, so I probably look at tool purchases a little differently than most other folks.

Yes, part of the movement is because the lock is only on one side, and part of it is because there has to be a certain amount of play in the mechanism in order for the thing to move at all. BTW this same kind of free play is present in lifts, too, but there's less of it. A lift is driven up and down by a drivetrain rather than slid up and down by hand, so the tolerances can be tighter and the various components can be heavier and stiffer.

[Woodnut]

Bosch has come out with a new router table base designed for thru-the-top adjustments.

It was specifically designed to be compatible with the Bosch 1617, 1617-220v, 1617EVS, 1618 and 1618EVS routers.

You can see a review of the router by an outside source here.

I know that this discussion was about the Dewalt routers, but I just saw this in the March issue of American Woodworker (#113) and thought I would pipe up...

[Matthew Knerr]

I don't mind the direction this is taking. It's all very good info. It would still be nice to hear some ideas about the best way to go about it with this router. Although, I think if someone had some experience with the 621 in a table they would have chimed in by now. I might have implied I have money to throw at this, but I don't really. As I said initially, this isn't the best solution, but as per Pat's recommendation, I should be glad this is the router I have, having only one. He does say it can be upside down. I'm sure I'll figure something out, or make due, really. Thanks everyone.

Matt

[RickLab]

Right, sorry about that Matt. The DW621 is a really nice router - someone on here must have one. Maybe they will chime in with how they made it work in a router table.

[RickLab]

Just found this that may help you - I see it has mixed reviews on Amazon.

[Matthew Knerr]

Thanks, that's a good place to start, and for twenty bucks, it can't hurt.

[JohnnyTest]

I don't have a DW621 but I would like to offer some advice. I totally understand the fact of just starting out and not wanting to buy 2 of the same tool when perhaps you can get away with just one.

If I were you I would basically give it a try. I wouldn't recommend using it in the BT3100. But what I would recommend is that you just a small piece of 3/4" or 5/8" MDF. Using the base plate that comes with the router, mark the mounting holes and drill the center hole, and mount up the router. This will give you a cheap router table that will help you understand what is possible with the router. Then you can try to see what adjustments can be made. And I would think the $20 for the adjuster will be just what you will need.
In my opinion, you can totally get away with using it to route. I would see no problem with routing dados with it, or well really anything. It may take additional time to set the bit height, but well its not going to cost you anymore cash. With all due respect, Pat Warner has great advice, but he also must have a heavy wallet, not everyone can afford 3-4 routers like he recommends, especailly not someone just starting out and needs other tools besides a router. With the MDF table you can quickly bolt the router to it, the BT3100 will require alot more work to get it mounted up there and since your not sure of the capability, I recommend the quick and easy MDF try. As far as a fence, you can simple use some stock and clamp it down.