Shaper versus Router table

[chopnhack]

It seems to me that you can pickup a used shaper for reasonable prices lately. I saw a 1991 Grizzly for sale for $300. If you were to setup a comparable router table with cast iron top and a lift mechanism and router you would be out more money. Obviously having a handheld for working on large pieces is a must, it makes me think more of trying to pickup a used shaper. What do you guys think?

[LCHIEN]

There's at least a couple of threads here on the topic, just search for router shaper
examples:

http://www.bt3central.com/showthread...=router+shaper
http://www.bt3central.com/showthread...=router+shaper
http://www.bt3central.com/showthread...=router+shaper
http://www.bt3central.com/showthread...=router+shaper
http://www.bt3central.com/showthread...=router+shaper

[leehljp]

To me, a shaper is more specific to shaping and molding. The draw for a shaper (again, to me) is to "have it." IF I were into cabinets and remodeling more than one house, or regular fine furniture making, then it would be a good deal. But for once a year to once every other year, then the router would be more sense. I say this from the cost of "bits". I have nearly 200 router bits and a little over half of them are 1/2 inch. About 60 are shaper-molding. There is no way I could accumulate that many bits for a "shaper" because of the extra cost. IF I were in the business or doing it regularly as a hobby, then it might make sense.

I like collecting tools that I use, but this is one tool that the cost of bits to get started keeps me from going in that direction, since I have a viable alternative (router). I know that I can use my 1/2 router bits on some shapers, but again, I don't gain enough benefit for my own use to go that route just yet.

In spite of what I wrote above, I STILL am drawn to look at a shaper every time I see one. There is that inner pull that says "I want one!"

Just my personal opinion.

[chopnhack]

There's at least a couple of threads here on the topic, just search for router shaper
example:

http://www.bt3central.com/showthread...=router+shaper

Sorry Loring, I searched for shaper and didnt find anything on the first page. Didn't know we had that capability for a string search like that, good to know, thanks! I will go back and peruse

Lee, lol, thats the best reason to buy one, right ;P But seriously, I would think that the fine adjustment you get with the crank wheel on a shaper beats having to buy an aftermarket router raizer, etc. As you mentioned some units accept a 1/2" collet, why would someone not want to go this route? The unit has everything built in that you would otherwise have to reinvent yourself. What are the drawbacks? I have a hitachi m12v (old one) for free work but have had some serious short comings with setup - one particular nasty fiasco with a lock miter bit that killed several hours

[leehljp]

. . . The unit has everything built in that you would otherwise have to reinvent yourself. What are the drawbacks? I have a hitachi m12v (old one) for free work but have had some serious short comings with setup - one particular nasty fiasco with a lock miter bit that killed several hours

Setting up and adjusting . . . in one of the links inside of Lorings link made mention of the fact that shapers are for all day production runs in which you don't change and adjust. Set it once and leave it at that. To run a shaper for one item and changing it (bit) for another item is putting the shaper into the same category of a router. Yes, set up is needed for both and the height adjustment is an advantage in general of a shaper, but the purpose of shapers vs router tables in their original design was not for adjustment but for leaving a bit set to one height for repeatability.

It was this very reason that I made router table with two routers - so that I would not have to change bits and constantly adjust the height to get it right again on the router table. One bit stays in always through a project, and then for changing bits, I used the other router.

You are looking at the adjustability of the shaper as the primary advantage. That is OK for sure, but that is not the primary purpose/advantage for which shapers in general are considered. Having said that, I can see a change in the fact that less expensive home shop models are coming our way. These will be used almost identically as router tables. The only advantage will be any special features such as height adjustment, which are available on some routers and as an option on some tables.

[cabinetman]

There are points that should be considered. Shapers don't usually have the speeds of most routers. An advantage to shaper set-up is distance under the nut. Knives can be installed that machine vertically, or horizontally.

I will say that the smaller shapers and I'm referring to the 1/2", and 3/4" spindles, can be easily outperformed by some routers. When you get into machinery that can handle 1" and 1.25" spindles, those are a different breed. If you ever have had the opportunity to operate a shaper, you will realize right off how important a power feeder really is. So, I suggest that if you have the need for that type of machine figure to add a power feeder.

A well set up router table IMO, is more worthwhile of a machine.

.

[chopnhack]

Thanks guys, I have no experience with shapers. I really don't know more than what I have seen via pics so my perception of them is misguided. I will read those links later today. Thanks for the input!

[LCHIEN]

Thanks guys, I have no experience with shapers. I really don't know more than what I have seen via pics so my perception of them is misguided. I will read those links later today. Thanks for the input!

i added more links in my previous post in this thread, in case you missed them.

[cabinetman]

i added more links in my previous post in this thread, in case you missed them.

Quite a few threads on the subject.

.

[chopnhack]

Yes, the read was quite authoritative, however, LarryG surmised quite well what I was thinking:

I'll take a slightly contrarian view, but only for the sake of completeness. More than once I've read that by the time you build a nice, full-featured router table, buy the big 3+HP router, buy the lift, etc. ... you probably could've paid for a very nice shaper from the used market. Some (maybe all?) shapers have collet adapters that allow you to use router bits in them, so if a guy found a good deal on a used shaper and used only router bits in it, he'd actually have a pretty nice and arguably superior "router table."
__________________
Larry

I am a hobbyist, but my last attempt with my router table making molding was a bit disappointing. I can easily see my router table being used to make more moldings that is why I thought to ask about the shaper. I thought that with a router bit in the shaper you could make dadoes, etc. But the other threads state shapers are edge only tools. Very good to know! Thanks everybody!

[cabinetman]

Yes, the read was quite authoritative, however, LarryG surmised quite well what I was thinking:

I'll take a slightly contrarian view, but only for the sake of completeness. More than once I've read that by the time you build a nice, full-featured router table, buy the big 3+HP router, buy the lift, etc. ... you probably could've paid for a very nice shaper from the used market. Some (maybe all?) shapers have collet adapters that allow you to use router bits in them, so if a guy found a good deal on a used shaper and used only router bits in it, he'd actually have a pretty nice and arguably superior "router table."
__________________
Larry

I am a hobbyist, but my last attempt with my router table making molding was a bit disappointing. I can easily see my router table being used to make more moldings that is why I thought to ask about the shaper. I thought that with a router bit in the shaper you could make dadoes, etc. But the other threads state shapers are edge only tools. Very good to know! Thanks everybody!

IMO, a table router setup and a shaper are two distinctively different machines. If all I had was a shaper and used only router bits I wouldn't think I had a superior "router table". One major problem is that shapers max out at about 10K RPM (AFAIK), which is too slow for many routing situations.

.

[chopnhack]

Good point, that may be a tad too slow in some cases...

[JimD]

There are a few things a shaper could do that are outside of the realistic capabilities of my router table. Like do the cope and stick on interior (or exterior) doors. I see where there are router bits for it now but they look huge. I don't believe that profile can be cut in one pass and with multiple passes comes some at least potential inaccuracy.

Large raised panel cuts are also shaper territory. Router bits only go up to somewhere in the 1 to 1.5 inch cut range. Vertical bits don't seem to work very well.

The large cutters of a shaper should also stay sharp longer. But they cost more so they have to for break-even.

Cabinet doors are easily in the range of a single cut on a router table. I find the raised panel my router can do to be fine.

If money and space were unlimited I would have both (with a power feeder). But neither is unlimited for me and I am happy with my router table. I used an old Ryobi R-500 motor (13.3A) since the plunge mechanism had started to stick. I built my own lift based upon an old American Woodworker article and spent under $100 for parts. I have drawers for bit storage (based upon Norm's table). It works great and if I had started with a new router I could still repeat this for around $300 - 400.

A router table can be cheaper and the bits are definitely cheaper. You don't have to dedicate a router to just this one task further reducing evaluated cost. I can't see eliminating a router table in favor of a shaper. Having both would sometimes be nice but if limited to one, I think the vast majority of us are better off with the router table.

Jim

[LarryG]

IMO, a table router setup and a shaper are two distinctively different machines. If all I had was a shaper and used only router bits I wouldn't think I had a superior "router table".

Just to be clear, "cabinetman" ... I don't think so, either. Your reply seems to suggest that I do. The fact is, I don't. Note that I began by saying I would take a contrarian view largely in the interests of completeness -- i.e., to help present all sides of the argument. That is why I used the word "arguably" and enclosed the words "router table" in quotes. Further, I stated that I was merely passing along comments and views that I had read elsewhere.

As Hank and JimD say (and others too, in those other threads), there are situations in which a shaper would be a better choice than a router table. The issue is whether the individual woodworker happens to be confronting those situations often enough to justify having a shaper in addition to, or even in place of, a router table. Most likely, he is not. But he might be.

Even the most casual reading of the various threads to which Loring supplied links will show that my various replies on the subject come down heavily on the side of a conventional router table for the average hobbyist woodworker. And more than once I pointed readers to an article written by router guru extraordinaire Pat Warner, who certainly has better credentials and can speak more authoritatively on the matter than anyone here.

[cabinetman]

Just to be clear, "cabinetman" ... I don't think so, either. Your reply seems to suggest that I do. The fact is, I don't.

I wasn't suggesting anything. I just stated a fact based on my experience of having both router tables and shapers used extensively to earn a living.

And more than once I pointed readers to an article written by router guru extraordinaire Pat Warner, who certainly has better credentials and can speak more authoritatively on the matter than anyone here.

That may or may not be true, but, you're entitled to your opinion on that.

.