Grandchildren Toys from WoodCentral
This discussion thread began with a post from a woodworker who wondered if homemade wooden toys from a grandfather could compete with today's toys filled with bells and whistles – and, if so, which wooden toys might come out on top of such a competition. - Editor
"The grandkids are two and five. In the past, I have made them some toys that might become heirlooms, such as movable cranes and articulated pull toys. The kids have an overwhelming number of 'modern' toys that make noises and move on their own. What I have made has been lost in the shuffle. Any thoughts for what to make for little kids these days?" - Jerry G.
Several of the responses in the thread came from posters whose grandchildren are now grown, who were able to share their perspective on the types of gifts that lasted – and made a lasting impression. - Editor
"Interesting question, it made me stop and think of what has survived among the toys made for my kids/grandkids/great grandkids. The only thing that has survived and is still being used by one (of 4) grandsons is a fairly simple toolbox/stool that he uses to keep his tools and repair his mountain bikes. The lad is now finished high school and is working in a bike shop and still uses that plywood box with a lift-out tray for work and takes it with him when he's out biking on the weekends. The granddaughters have had doll cradles, both full-size and dolly size, that are now being handed down to their little ones. I think the most popular of the bunch has been the nanny cradles where the kid has a seat beside the cradle part. Rocking horses have always been 'must haves,' and two of them have survived into the third generation. I think though, that we have become a throwaway society and there are few things that will survive a relatively short time let alone a generation." - Gerry
"The most successful toy I built for my grandchildren were bank trucks. There is a saw kerf in each truck top for coins. They are used, though not quite the same way as the plastic modern creations." - George
"If they are girls, it won't be too many years from now that they will need and use a nice jewelry box or two. Something they may keep for many years. Boys are another difficulty." - Paul
"I built two 'stuff' boxes for two of my grandsons: nothing elaborate or fancy like the jewelry boxes my granddaughters have. I used white oak for the back, front and coopered lid, and stained with Minwax® 'Golden Oak' The sides of the box and lid were from clear coated aromatic red cedar. They look nice enough for a bureau top, and masculine enough from the choice of woods." - George
"I made a rocking horse for my niece when she was five. It got a lot of use. When she was four, I made her a doll cradle, liked it, but not so much use. When she was six, I made her a toy box, a classic five-board box with cedar in the bottom. I am 20 years older than my sister, her mother, and I made her one, too, when she was little, and she still has it. I built them so that they turn into adult cedar chests later. I have done a bunch over the years, and they are always a hit." - Barry
"No grandchildren for me yet, but some of the things I have made for my own kids that have been 'hits are the more useful things rather than 'toys.' As some of the posts above, boxes for 'stuff' and 'treasures' are good for both boys and girls. (I'm talking about small, dresser-top type boxes.) Rocking horses are also good, and for my boys, I made wooden riding tractors that were pretty well-used. I've also made some post-office-box-door banks. I hope all of those things will one day get passed on to grandchildren." - John E.
"I've made numerous toys for my grandkids (age .5 to 9), and they must get played with because once in a while I get a toy back asking if I can fix it. I make most toys from
The Great All American Wooden Toy Book by Norm Marshall. My granddaughter also has doll furniture that I made. I've made wooden blocks, car ramps for Matchbox® cars to zoom down, rubber band-powered cars and two-liter water rockets." - Lee
You Don't Need a Huge Motor on a Band Saw? from WoodCentral
Back when the original poster's 1940s band saw was built, a 1/2hp motor on that kind of tool seemed pretty average. Is it still adequate today, he wonders, or are the modern motors with their bigger horsepowers really better? - Editor
"Tonight, I resawed a piece of 8/4 cherry that was just under 9" wide, using a blade that was probably less than optimal: a 1/2" x 6 tpi hook blade. It went just fine using my 1940's era Walker-Turner 16" band saw. The reason I'm posting about this is that my band saw still has the original 1/2 HP motor on it. If you read anything about bandsaws today, it seems that serious 14" band saws have a 3/4hp motor at the bargain end of the range, and quickly move to a 1hp motor, and can be gotten with 1-1/2p motors. Move up to a 17" band saw, and you're taking about 2hp minimum.
"I looked at some old machinery catalogs from that era, and it seems that most band saws in the 14-16" size came with a 1/2hp motor max. I'm sure that they had to resaw boards back in the day as well. So, if 1/2hp was good enough for resawing back then, why was there a motor HP escalation over the years?" - Wilbur
One suggested reason was manufacturing cost. - Editor
"Someone who bought one of those from me recently was told by two people with the engineering/manufacturing background to know that building a 1/2hp repulsion-induction motor to the standards of the 50s would cost $900-1,400 today." - Bill H.
Others cited time-saving advantages of greater motor power. - Editor
"Wilbur, do you earn your living using that saw? I earn my living out in my shop, and I changed my motor from 5hp to 7.5hp. It would rip that 9" at the speed yours cuts 3/4". Time is money. I like my power." - Keith
"You say you cut a piece. What if you needed to cut 50 pieces or many pieces several times a week? You may appreciate more power then. More hp means faster cutting. So I'd say it just depends on what a guy is doing. I have always been advocate of more power is better. The only thing that really matters is if you're happy, then that's all that counts." - Richard
"I used to have that same saw...Great band saw! I was doing some pretty serious band sawing in those days, and I found that the original motor just couldn't cut the resawing jobs I was forcing on it. I replaced it with a 1-1/2hp Baldor, and the results were remarkable. Can you tell I'm an advocate for larger motors? It's not that you absolutely can't get by with an old underpowered one, but I don't think you should have to sacrifice blade speed for power." - Ellis
The question of the across-the-board increase in horsepower, however, still puzzled the original poster. - Editor
"I certainly understand the advantages of having a bigger motor, and granted, I'm not in production mode. But this still doesn't explain why, if you look at catalogs from the 1940s, this particular band saw and band saws of similar sizes were really only sold with a 1/2hp motor back in the day. They certainly had motors with more horsepower back then, so it's not like a 1-1/2hp motor hadn't been invented yet. From the 1940 Walker-Turner catalog listing for the woodworking model of this band saw, they say 12-inch capacity between upper guides and tables afford unusual capacity,' so clearly this saw was meant to handle resawing a 9" board. The motor that they list on that page is a 1/2hp 1740 RPM motor." - Wilbur
The moderator of the site, a participant in the discussion, suggested one possible answer. - Editor
"I can't really see the motor you're using, but if it is the repulsion-induction variety, which seems likely, I think I've heard that that style has a bit more output horsepower than the newer style motors. (I'm way outta school here, so I'll defer to someone who knows more about motors to set the record straight.) Motors were a lot heavier in those days relative to their horsepower. We had a 2hp motor on our 36" band saw that must've weighed 250 lbs. It was about 2' in diameter and 2-1/2' long.' - Ellis
Also, another poster threw into the discussion that one reason the smaller horsepower motor seemed to work so well could be because of the type of blade used with it. - Editor
"As I recall in your first post, you are using a 6 tpi blade. It won't matter what motor you put on the machine, you are going to have to use a slow feed rate to keep from clogging up the tiny teeth. I am not at all surprised that a small motor will drive these tiny teeth. If the gullets are clogged, they mostly aren't cutting. In a 9" piece, you have 54 teeth in the material, twice the maximum recommended and three times optimum. So the relevant question becomes, when sawing a 9" piece with something close to the optimum number of tpi what horsepower is needed to drive the blade? If someone was production sawing lumber this wide, they would be using a 1-1/2 tpi blade, and it will take a substantial motor to drive it." - Bill T.