Does anyone have a drawing of the hole setout for a Dewalt DW625ek type 4 base plate? I have been searching for this for a long time on the web and have even contacted DeWalt. Amazingly they say they don't have one! The only drawing I can find (on this site and also from DeWalt themselves) shows linear dimensions between the mounting holes but does not provide a pitch circle diameter. Without this the dimensions are of no use. Also the drawing gives no reference to the cutter center lines. Ideally I need a drawing that gives the set out for the holes and the cutter centre relevant to x and y reference lines. If anyone can help I would be very grateful. I would have thought this is something that router manufactures would include in the user manual!:no:
DW625eK base plate
1 - 20 of 28 Posts
Welcome to the forum John . Sorry I can't help ya , but many here will be happy to help
Joined
·
31,266 Posts
welcome to the forums John....
stay around.. this place will grow on you...
why can't you transfer punch hole locations and then use a plunge straight bit to bore the center hole after you drill out the plate and mount it...
http://www.amazon.com/Grizzly-G5651-Transfer-Punch-28-Piece/dp/B0000DD4EX
transfer from the base to the plate...
transfer from one plate to another...
use dowel center transfers to mark w/...
Set of Dowel Centers - Package of 8 - Rockler Woodworking Tools
screw cone pointed set screws into the screw holes w/ the point to the plate..
https://www.standoffsystems.com/Cone-Point-Set-Screws/
stay around.. this place will grow on you...
why can't you transfer punch hole locations and then use a plunge straight bit to bore the center hole after you drill out the plate and mount it...
http://www.amazon.com/Grizzly-G5651-Transfer-Punch-28-Piece/dp/B0000DD4EX
transfer from the base to the plate...
transfer from one plate to another...
use dowel center transfers to mark w/...
Set of Dowel Centers - Package of 8 - Rockler Woodworking Tools
screw cone pointed set screws into the screw holes w/ the point to the plate..
https://www.standoffsystems.com/Cone-Point-Set-Screws/
Joined
·
12,004 Posts
Transfer screws are the easiest way to get the exact hole locations. Remove your sub base plate, put it and the screws in a zip lock bag then label it. Install the transfer screws an even number of turns into the router base. In photo 3 both the large Porter Cable 3 hole mounting pattern and the smaller Bosch 4 hole mounting pattern have transfer screws in them.
If you are installing a mounting plate or base that accepts Porter Cable guide bushings you can use a centering kit like the ones shown from Rousseau or Infinity. The Rousseau kit includes the centering ring, pin, transfer screws and longer mounting screws. A centering cone will work for these and other sized openings; I recommend the Bosch centering cone as it has a much larger diameter than the DeWalt centering cone which only works in the PC sized openings.
Center your router using either the centering kit or cone and lightly tap the base with a hammer. This will mark your hole locations in your material.
Since you are asking about the DeWalt 625 I thought you might be interested in seeing the Woodrat plunge bar. With this bar installed you can plunge your router with one hand. Woodrat also offers plunge bars to fit other routers.
If you are installing a mounting plate or base that accepts Porter Cable guide bushings you can use a centering kit like the ones shown from Rousseau or Infinity. The Rousseau kit includes the centering ring, pin, transfer screws and longer mounting screws. A centering cone will work for these and other sized openings; I recommend the Bosch centering cone as it has a much larger diameter than the DeWalt centering cone which only works in the PC sized openings.
Center your router using either the centering kit or cone and lightly tap the base with a hammer. This will mark your hole locations in your material.
Since you are asking about the DeWalt 625 I thought you might be interested in seeing the Woodrat plunge bar. With this bar installed you can plunge your router with one hand. Woodrat also offers plunge bars to fit other routers.
Attachments
" If anyone can help I would be very grateful. I would have thought this is........"
**********************************
I make base plates for the 625. (But I do not provide a plan for the hole centers, etc.)
********************************************
**********************************
I make base plates for the 625. (But I do not provide a plan for the hole centers, etc.)
********************************************
Joined
·
16,386 Posts
As much as possible I would try and just transfer the placements from one to the other. The one thing that gets you into trouble more often than any other process is measuring. If you insist on measuring then I would disagree with your statement that you need the circle pitch diameter of the holes. The holes must display some sort of symmetry even if they aren't evenly spaced like the ones on my Hitachi M12V2. One thing is a fact, if there are 4 holes then a line drawn across opposing screw holes will cross the dead center. If there are 3 holes then a lines drawn from the midpoint of the line between two holes to the 3rd point will cross dead center with the others.
The distance from the points to dead center is the distance from any point to the center opening plus 1/2 the distance across the opening. All of that should more than enough data to locate the holes properly.
The distance from the points to dead center is the distance from any point to the center opening plus 1/2 the distance across the opening. All of that should more than enough data to locate the holes properly.
Joined
·
384 Posts
While reading this thread I've been thinking about why would someone need to go through such precision to attach the plate. Why not hold one plate to the other and mark the holes with pencil? I've come up with two answers, please respond if you know of others I'm missing. 1) keeping it centered on the router allows one to use the edge of the router plate as a guide because the bit is equidistant from any place on the edge of the plate. 2) OCD
I haven't used the edge of the plate as a guide in years since I built a router table with fence. Occasionally I'll use bearings and guide bushings... Oh I just realized that if the perimeter of the plate is off, so is the bushing.
Are there other reasons?
Mike you were using the centering jig in the table plate, is there a reason there or just because you had the tool already?
thanks
Everend
I haven't used the edge of the plate as a guide in years since I built a router table with fence. Occasionally I'll use bearings and guide bushings... Oh I just realized that if the perimeter of the plate is off, so is the bushing.
Are there other reasons?
Mike you were using the centering jig in the table plate, is there a reason there or just because you had the tool already?
thanks
Everend
Joined
·
12,004 Posts
Everend, it is critical that your router is centered on a mounting pate or with its sub base plate for use with guide bushings. If you are using a large diameter bit having the plate centered can make the difference between chewing an off center hole and just fitting through. Even for those who are not currently using guide bushings it makes sense to set up so you can in the future. If you are doing inlay work you need your sub base plate centered so your cuts are accurate. Centering kits and cones are under $10 and I feel this is money well spent.
If your router uses slotted screws to attach the sub base pate I highly recommend that you change them to Phillips, Allen or Robertson(square drive) screws; this will save you from problems down the road.
If your router uses slotted screws to attach the sub base pate I highly recommend that you change them to Phillips, Allen or Robertson(square drive) screws; this will save you from problems down the road.
Hi all.
I am feeling that you all think this is a very simple problem and you are all right – it is called a fully dimensioned drawing!
To start with Everend first, you are correct in all you say including the no 2 option!
By way of an explanation, I am not a woodworker at least not in the way that you all are. I come from a precision engineering background where dimensions were always critical and I had the reputation of being the tightest of the tight when it came to tolerances (hence the nickname). Great for my previous life but not when working in wood!
I am designing a new router table and base plates to improve my abilities and options with a router. The table I am designing is a combined horizontal and inverted vertical table and so far I am still doing the cad drawings for it. My previous or current table is a simple table with only a fence and no mitre or T slots and the fence isn’t even split although this is a simple mod to improve but I have never needed it because I have always worked between the fence and the bit. My existing table and offset plates were made using the exact method described by Stick486. I then dimensioned the holes and made a template with 0.3mm holes at the hole centres for future use. Years later and recently I found a drawing on the web for the base plate giving linear dimensions for adjacent pairs of holes. For the five hole pattern there are five different dimensions and for the three hole pattern there are two dimensions. Whilst there is an assumed symmetry between the holes, drawing a line between opposing holes does not describe the arbour centre or even the same centre. Also, for the five hole pattern, if the holes were equidistant you could assume they described a circle but they are not and they do not show an obvious relationship to the arbour crs., and even so it would be an assumption. Without at least a dimension between two pairs of opposing holes or a PCD there is an infinite quantity of locations on which the holes could exist and still maintain the dimensions between the holes given on the drawing. Also there needs to be a stated relationship to the arbour centre. Therefore the drawing is as much as tits on a fish! Also given any pattern of mounting holes, be it 3, 4, 5, or even 6 there is no requirement for them to be coincident to the arbour crs. Drawing a line between any of them is simply assuming that the manufacture has centred them on the arbour.
Hopefully you all now understand my dilemma, yes I may be OCD about my PCD’s but it is for good reason. Drawing a line between opposing pairs of holes in a four hole set only describes the centre IF the holes are equidistant between each hole and also diagonally. And then it only describes the centre point of the hole pattern and not necessarily anything else.
Errmm….I don’t spose anyone has a drawing………do they?
I am feeling that you all think this is a very simple problem and you are all right – it is called a fully dimensioned drawing!
To start with Everend first, you are correct in all you say including the no 2 option!
By way of an explanation, I am not a woodworker at least not in the way that you all are. I come from a precision engineering background where dimensions were always critical and I had the reputation of being the tightest of the tight when it came to tolerances (hence the nickname). Great for my previous life but not when working in wood!
I am designing a new router table and base plates to improve my abilities and options with a router. The table I am designing is a combined horizontal and inverted vertical table and so far I am still doing the cad drawings for it. My previous or current table is a simple table with only a fence and no mitre or T slots and the fence isn’t even split although this is a simple mod to improve but I have never needed it because I have always worked between the fence and the bit. My existing table and offset plates were made using the exact method described by Stick486. I then dimensioned the holes and made a template with 0.3mm holes at the hole centres for future use. Years later and recently I found a drawing on the web for the base plate giving linear dimensions for adjacent pairs of holes. For the five hole pattern there are five different dimensions and for the three hole pattern there are two dimensions. Whilst there is an assumed symmetry between the holes, drawing a line between opposing holes does not describe the arbour centre or even the same centre. Also, for the five hole pattern, if the holes were equidistant you could assume they described a circle but they are not and they do not show an obvious relationship to the arbour crs., and even so it would be an assumption. Without at least a dimension between two pairs of opposing holes or a PCD there is an infinite quantity of locations on which the holes could exist and still maintain the dimensions between the holes given on the drawing. Also there needs to be a stated relationship to the arbour centre. Therefore the drawing is as much as tits on a fish! Also given any pattern of mounting holes, be it 3, 4, 5, or even 6 there is no requirement for them to be coincident to the arbour crs. Drawing a line between any of them is simply assuming that the manufacture has centred them on the arbour.
Hopefully you all now understand my dilemma, yes I may be OCD about my PCD’s but it is for good reason. Drawing a line between opposing pairs of holes in a four hole set only describes the centre IF the holes are equidistant between each hole and also diagonally. And then it only describes the centre point of the hole pattern and not necessarily anything else.
Errmm….I don’t spose anyone has a drawing………do they?
"Errmm….I don’t spose anyone has a drawing………do they?"
************************************************************
I would add, country of origin also plays a role with respect to the hole pattern and arbor center. Moreover, (& I have monitored this for many years), the manufacturing in a given plant is variable, despite being 100% CNC.
What I'm saying is, given an engineering/assembly dwg, there is no guarantee it will hold (even +/- .010") from sample to sample!
So if you want precision, work off of your personal sample, not the dwg.
************************************************************
I would add, country of origin also plays a role with respect to the hole pattern and arbor center. Moreover, (& I have monitored this for many years), the manufacturing in a given plant is variable, despite being 100% CNC.
What I'm saying is, given an engineering/assembly dwg, there is no guarantee it will hold (even +/- .010") from sample to sample!
So if you want precision, work off of your personal sample, not the dwg.
Joined
·
16,386 Posts
Wood is not conducive to the kind of accuracy you are accustomed to. It changes dimension constantly because of humidity changes and there is nothing that can prevent that.
This is a tremendously dangerous practice and should never be done. I've seen a video where Bill Hylton did it but he actually used 2 fences so that the wood was also trapped between the fences as well. There is the real possibility of the piece you are working on to get grabbed by the bit and get launched at near supersonic speeds. The same concerns apply to using a table saw fence as a stop for repetitive cuts.
We have seen this before with people who are accustomed to working in metal and the mental transition to what works with wood can be a difficult one (just ask Jerry Bowen). Your best bet is to machine in some adjustment and use a centering cone to manually get it to the best acceptable accuracy. I would also suggest you have a look at Quillman's website (Pat Warner) as he has to be more accurate with what he does than the rest of us need to be. My personal motto is "if it looks good then it is good".
Joined
·
4,625 Posts
@mrmicron
I gather you will not find the documentation you are looking for...and I would assume, with your experience, you have already considered the alternatives.
The last base I made I started oversize, transferred the screw locations and drilled them for flat screws, then mounted the plate and found center. I then used that center to determine the actual concentric perimeter. I left it a bit bigger than the router base so I did not need to worry about the router frame getting in the way.
For another router I made a square base, same way, and I marked and use one of the edges all the time. I marked that base with the measurement from center to the edge for any mathematical needs...
I gather you will not find the documentation you are looking for...and I would assume, with your experience, you have already considered the alternatives.
The last base I made I started oversize, transferred the screw locations and drilled them for flat screws, then mounted the plate and found center. I then used that center to determine the actual concentric perimeter. I left it a bit bigger than the router base so I did not need to worry about the router frame getting in the way.
For another router I made a square base, same way, and I marked and use one of the edges all the time. I marked that base with the measurement from center to the edge for any mathematical needs...
I understand what you are saying Quillman but with all due respect, +/-0.010” is an order of tolerance that I would expect from someone using a pedestal drill. This is a total deviation of in excess of 1/2mm. A CNC machine should be easily capable of working to tolerances in the order of +/-0.0004" (+/-100 microns). Of course the tighter the tolerance the higher the cost due to higher quality machinery costs, more tool passes, more frequent tool tip changes, etc., and therefore as you say, it is possible that the tolerance gets backed off a bit. I would however still be bitterly disappointed in the quality of a product if I could beat it with a pointed setscrew and a pencil! Working off the drawing I have is as I said in my last post, simply not an option due to the lack of detail. I guess I was just hoping someone had a proper drawing to save some work.
Cherryville Chuck you stated that “This is a tremendously dangerous practice and should never be done.” Danger is a relative subject. I have seen a demonstration of what can happen when a work piece is fed into a router table from the trailing edge side of the bit. The demonstrator also fed it in by hand – BRAVE! I wonder if this was the same demonstration you mention as I seem to remember it was a routing celeb that did it. I have to say that with a bit of forethought, concentration, fingerboards and ALWAYS feeding into the leading edge of the cutter there seems to be little danger. I also tend to run my finger boards quite tight. Certainly I have never ever had a mishap by using this approach. Also I have both the bit rotation and feed direction etched onto the router base plate on my table so I do not even have to stop and think which is the safe(er) feed direction. Having said that I have never fallen off a ladder either but we are not allowed to use these anymore as they are now considered too dangerous.
I think that you Nick are right. I guess that I am just a bit disappointed as I expected to find a proliferation of such drawings on the web when I first searched and as seems to be the case with the web, you get sucked in to try just one more search! I have considered the alternatives and if I had access to a engineering lathe and a milling machine I would probably start from scratch and make a new (better) sole plate as well as the base plates and I would dowel the sole plate so different base plates could be fitted straight on without the need for centring cones etc., with a repeatability in the order +/-10 microns. Unfortunately I am now halfway around the world from that equipment. So I am going to do what I did last time, almost. First I will rough out the plate and mount it. Slightly oversize as you did. I will have to finish cut the round base plate using the router so I will use a point bit in the router after mounting it which will give me a centre for the trammel pivot point. I will then cut it to a perfect circle, remount it and bore out the centre. All I have to do then is add the counter bores for a guide bush set etc.. I haven’t figured this bit out yet but I am sure I will find a pretty accurate way to do it!
Quillman, just had a look at your sliding dovetail joints on this site. Ni…….ce work. You obviously are a man who understands accuracy and tolerance!
Cherryville Chuck you stated that “This is a tremendously dangerous practice and should never be done.” Danger is a relative subject. I have seen a demonstration of what can happen when a work piece is fed into a router table from the trailing edge side of the bit. The demonstrator also fed it in by hand – BRAVE! I wonder if this was the same demonstration you mention as I seem to remember it was a routing celeb that did it. I have to say that with a bit of forethought, concentration, fingerboards and ALWAYS feeding into the leading edge of the cutter there seems to be little danger. I also tend to run my finger boards quite tight. Certainly I have never ever had a mishap by using this approach. Also I have both the bit rotation and feed direction etched onto the router base plate on my table so I do not even have to stop and think which is the safe(er) feed direction. Having said that I have never fallen off a ladder either but we are not allowed to use these anymore as they are now considered too dangerous.
I think that you Nick are right. I guess that I am just a bit disappointed as I expected to find a proliferation of such drawings on the web when I first searched and as seems to be the case with the web, you get sucked in to try just one more search! I have considered the alternatives and if I had access to a engineering lathe and a milling machine I would probably start from scratch and make a new (better) sole plate as well as the base plates and I would dowel the sole plate so different base plates could be fitted straight on without the need for centring cones etc., with a repeatability in the order +/-10 microns. Unfortunately I am now halfway around the world from that equipment. So I am going to do what I did last time, almost. First I will rough out the plate and mount it. Slightly oversize as you did. I will have to finish cut the round base plate using the router so I will use a point bit in the router after mounting it which will give me a centre for the trammel pivot point. I will then cut it to a perfect circle, remount it and bore out the centre. All I have to do then is add the counter bores for a guide bush set etc.. I haven’t figured this bit out yet but I am sure I will find a pretty accurate way to do it!
Quillman, just had a look at your sliding dovetail joints on this site. Ni…….ce work. You obviously are a man who understands accuracy and tolerance!
Joined
·
16,386 Posts
John you are taking some steps to mitigate the risks of trapping the wood between the bit and fence but I have to ask why do need to do that? I don't find it necessary and I've been using a router for over 3 decades. As for the +/- 10 microns, that's the overkill we are talking about. The wood can move more than that in a day and that kind of accuracy in wood is not necessary.
Charles, The reason I do it is simply because my router table fence is a simple alloy angle section. I do not have the luxury of a split fence that I can offset by an amount equal to the depth of cut when using the router for sizing purposes. It's one of those jobs that I have never managed to find time to do yet and the next time you need the router you just make do with what you have. But I am trying to negate these problems with my new table-if I can find the time to make that too. That's what I need - a machine for making round tuits!:laugh:
Joined
·
16,386 Posts
John this a link to a thread where I showed pictures of my latest home made fence. Cost $5-10 and took about 3-4 hrs to make. Complete with sliding fences and dust control that is 95% effective on edge cuts. http://www.routerforums.com/table-mounted-routing/87746-router-table-fence.html Pictures are in post #3.
Thank you for the link Charles. When you use your fence for planning/sizing ops do you shim up on one side to allow for the depth of the removed material? The movable fence I am contemplating has three M6x1 mounting points. The M6 bolts are free rotating in the moving fence and tapped through my existing alloy fence. The idea is to be able to set the depth of the fence by turning the three knobs on the back of the fixed fence with one full turn being equal to 1mm. the reason for three knobs being to be able to adjust perpendicularity to the table and parallelity to the adjacent movable fence.
Joined
·
16,386 Posts
I have a jointer and a planer so I don't need to do those operations but some do and they shim the fence. Some just stick a strip of masking tape to a stationary fence also. I've read that plastic playing cards make excellent shims as the thickness from card to card is near perfect. They are long enough and wide enough so that you wouldn't need the screws and I would think that shims would be more accurate than turning screws. Lots of other things would tend to be very uniform as well such as sheet plastics, mdf, and high density pressed boards.
Hi MrMicron
I came across your thread when I was looking for the hole locations for a Dewalt 625 / Trend T11
The following link is to a PDF of the dimensions of the base for the T11
[ unfortunately the forum won't let me post the link as a new user
]
But search for "TREND BASE CONFIGURATION" and it should take you to the PDF
central mounting hole is 75mm above center
other two holes are 15mm below centerline and 57.5mm left and right of center
Hope this is of use
Regards
Dave
I came across your thread when I was looking for the hole locations for a Dewalt 625 / Trend T11
The following link is to a PDF of the dimensions of the base for the T11
[ unfortunately the forum won't let me post the link as a new user
]But search for "TREND BASE CONFIGURATION" and it should take you to the PDF
central mounting hole is 75mm above center
other two holes are 15mm below centerline and 57.5mm left and right of center
Hope this is of use
Regards
Dave
1 - 20 of 28 Posts
