The Sanding Vs Scraping Debate - Which is Better?
Вставка
- Опубліковано 25 сер 2024
- Get those free plans here:
go.themakersmo...
If you want an even, consistent professional grade finish on your woodwork, you need to sand. And not just sand - sand it properly. Scraping will take you only so far, and some guys stop there, but proper sanding bumps it up to the next level.
Part of the folklore of the hand tool religion is that you need to sand after scraping anyway, because the scraped surface will be, and I'm quoting here: "Too smooth for finish to adhere to properly". You can try that yourself as well, to see if that holds up. I've never had a surface that was too smooth for a finish to stick to. Wood is porous, so finish will always key into it.
Also, most finishes need to be sanded between coats so there's no avoiding it. Just like any other tool for working wood, use it and learn to do it properly and not overdo it.
You can help support the work I do in making these videos:
Project plans for sale: ibuildit.ca/pl...
Support this channel on Patreon:
www.patreon.co...
#ibuildit
#tipsandtricks
My main channel:
/ jpheisz
My home reno channel:
/ ibuildithome
My "Scrap bin" channel:
/ ibuilditscrapbin
Website: ibuildit.ca/
Facebook: / i-build-it-25804801424...
Instagram: / i_build_it.ca
Get those free plans here:
go.themakersmob.com/john-heisz-6-plans-bundle/?via=ibuildit
If you want an even, consistent professional grade finish on your woodwork, you need to sand. And not just sand - sand it properly. Scraping will take you only so far, and some guys stop there, but proper sanding bumps it up to the next level.
Part of the folklore of the hand tool religion is that you need to sand after scraping anyway, because the scraped surface will be, and I'm quoting here: "Too smooth for finish to adhere to properly". You can try that yourself as well, to see if that holds up. I've never had a surface that was too smooth for a finish to stick to. Wood is porous, so finish will always key into it.
Also, most finishes need to be sanded between coats so there's no avoiding it. Just like any other tool for working wood, use it and learn to do it properly and not overdo it.
I fall into the scraper camp. Not because I think scraping with a piece of steel is superior to scraping with pieces of aluminum oxide glued on a piece of paper. I don't like dealing with the sanding dust, respirators, extension cords, and sound of a sander when I don't have to.
Way faster though and I don’t mind cleaning up especially for a better result.
There was a violin maker on roy underhills woodwright shop.. and roy asked "now is this a sand surface?"
The violin maker, who studied abroad under well known violin craftsman in Germany and different places.
He replied "no, never...sanding clogs the wood pores and mares the fibers."
Sand paper is deffinently handy and has a lot of applications. Sometimes, I feel like sand paper is a bit of a gimmick almost designed in a time when scraping was the norm. "How can we make a product that they need and will have a constant need to keep buying it"....I feel like sandpaper came along to try and dip in and undermine people using card scrapers that they can make to any profile and be completely independent...
Im sure thats not the real reason but to me it somewhat seems that way.
No offense at all to those who prefer sanding.. I myself prefer a scraper. Keep it sharp and burnished and it shouldn't compress the wood. It is a learning curve and yes sanding is a much simpler solution.. scrapers deffinently make you independent. I mean you could go out in the woods and build furnature and never ever have a need to go to the store to buy sand paper.
You could also carry out a very simple set of handtools and so as you have food. You could theoretically stay out there indefinitely just building away...with no need to go buy something.
You can make joints in such away that gluing isn't even necessary.
That sort of self sufficiency and no dependence on big box stores makes handtool work such as scraping an invaluable tool.
As an aside, (and in my experiences of course) a scraped finish can help a figured wood to 'pop' when the stain is applied. Sanding helps to homogenize the finished look making grain differences less apparent. Stains will be more resistant to getting absorbed into a scraped finish.
Porous grains, like oak, need to be sanded anyways (eg. Wet sanding the Tung oil to help fill the grain).
Thanks for the comparison.
Cheers,
I've never used scrapers much, although I can see where they have their own uses & possible advantages I'm just a sanding kind of guy. That said, I appreciate your comparison and the info this brings. Thanks again for sharing such consistently high quality material.
Nice demo John. I used a scraper to knock-off the bulk then follow-up with sanding. The scaper is great when dealing with figured wood or alternating grain directions and eliminates a lot of sanding (which I hate). One key to preventing scraper grooves is to slightly round the outer edges of the scraper plus going in diagonals.
The ridges were from tiny (these ridges were very small) nicks in the edge of the scraper. Since I only use a scraper as a stock removal tool, I don't spend hours sharpening it for a perfect edge.
Professional cabinet maker here. Use both. Each has thier advantages and disadvantages. Depends on the application. Neither is better or worse, just which is the right tool for the job.
What would you say is the appropriate application for each?
@@justavian it truly varies depending on what your try to achieve. As stated in other comments ( some of the best on the internet frequently comment below) scraping up glue lines the scraper is the go-to . Trying to bevel laminate? Scraper for sure. Tight inside corners sanders cant reach? Scraper ( slightly modified to 88° to get into a corner easily). The field that needs done? Sander, much faster . Trying to homogenize a color? Sander. Tight, even grain? Sander. Each tool when used in the right application will outdo the other, and perform poorly when used for the wrong purpose. Hope this helps.
Great video as usual ! I completly agree, I believe both have their advantages and disadvantages. In a way I hate making dust and having to switch from one grain to another ... but it leaves a different finish that appeals to the touch. And scrapping takes less time and is less messy. Keep the videos coming, they're always a treat to watch !
What I've often seen when using a scraper is that the softer parts of the wood get compressed down a bit while the harder parts get cut. This results in quite an uneven surface (following the grain) when the wood springs back in the days after. Uneven is a very relative term here, we are talking about a tenth of a millimeter max, but it is definitely visible and I don't like the feel of it. So sanding it is for me. (picking up stain much more unevenly can be a thing as well)
Where I really do like a scraper though is for cleaning up glue lines between boards when making a panel out of boards. Sanding is risky here because the glue is usually harder than the wood around it and it's easy to sand a dent into the boards (and the glue gums up the sandpaper). A scraper is the safer bet and after the joint is flat, sanding over it works fine.
if that’s happening it means the scraper needs burnishing because it’s dull.
I prefer a scraper to get the bulk of things. Then a quick hand sand with 220 grit. Saves a lot of sanding and gives good results.
then i go to #600 , 100 strokes on the show surfaces
I was going to argue, but I changed my mind. Well done sir.
As one of those who questioned (not based on any great experience), it's good to see you answer the question with this video. Explains a lot, thanks.
Greetings from South Africa.
What I do after sanding with 220 gritt take a damp cloth and wipe over surfaces, wait to dry and sand again with 220. surface is then much smoother.
I'm using scraper for rough cleaning - as a replacement for 80 grit sandpaper. Then I switch to sanding. That approach works especially well to repair surface - for removing old finish.
BTW, to avoid sharp ridges you need a thinner scraper, mine is about 0.06", so you will be able to bend scraper slightly
I use handtools including planes and scrapers at some point on most projects for three distinct reasons. First, I find them quicker at removing marks left by certain power tools, especially burns from table saw or router on things like hard maple. Second, there can be situations where a powertool can't fit or can't offer the necessary precision without a significant amount of jigging up. Finally, woodworking for me is 100% a recreational hobby and I actually enjoy the handtool process even though it obviously can be slower and in some cases my skills still don't deliver quite the precision a power tool can. However, I don't believe there is any what I would consider, a quality project where I have not at least done some hand sanding before finish. I have certainly seen an improvement in the finished surface when I hit it with 220 grit as a final step even if I my plane/scraper was as well prepared as I could manage and I hadn't felt any grooves or ridges. One point I certainly agree on, I never use a ROS in the final sanding step, hand sanding with the grain even at the same grit, is always the last step before finish.
I'll be doing at least one hand tool only project in the new year, but that would mainly be for the sake of the video. Even though I greatly enjoy the process of woodworking, I'm long pass the stage where I want to drag out operations that I know I can do faster (and typically better) with power tools and modern techniques.
good sound advice John... totally agree about hand planing...it has happened to me
I never herd of a scraper until recently
Neither sanding nor scraping is better, they're just different, experts with one will swear by their method. For the work I do the fine fibres that sanding leaves proud are absolutely wrong yet they're what gives the silky smooth feel that is prized in other woodworking.
Very wise words John. Matches with my experience almost exactly, especially the last bit about planes. I often fill in knot holes with epoxy, which gives an acceptable blackish fill, which, when smooth looks great. However, if you use a plane to smooth the epoxy and it grabs the grain... AAAAHHHHhhhh The graduations of finish that sanding allows is much more customisable than the one size fits all scraper.
Thanks for the video.
Wood Whisperer did a comparison test like this a while back. It's worth checking out. Love your work, John! Happy New Year!
I would be interested to see a side-by-side on a wood which is more challenging to get a smooth, even finish on. In my experience, in woods like cherry scraping leads to less blotchiness.
Good coverage on this subject. Many times areas, of a project , is sufficient with the scraper and no need to spend more time. Where sanding is needed sand the hell out of it if you want. lol.
Good vid,
Lee
Never scraped but maybe I should give it a try just to see the difference.
Good informative video.
good points.......also years ago they only had a scrapper and that was their sandpaper back then,
an if your edges were sharp you would have glass smooth surfaces,
plus if you use sandpaper look under a magnified lens you would see orbital spiral type scratch left from the sandpaper.
properly sharpened scrappers wouldn't leave marks behind, at least mine don't and i use scrappers all the time .......... just remember, famous luthier's used hand scrapers for years and still do till this day,
A random orbital sander, simply by the method in which they work, cannot and will not leave any markings discernible under a microscope, if the user is properly using the tool.
While I have plenty of reasons to like a hand scraper (it's much easier to get into nooks and crannies in cabinetry details than sandpaper) it's simply a situation where time has given better technology for 99% of uses.
And that there's no time investment to "sharpening" sandpaper means that not only do more people get into woodworking, but they end up with pieces showing less damage, since they never have to worry about it not being sharp enough.
a properly set up smoothing plane is designed to handle cross grain. that’s really what they are for. if you have straight grain, you can get away with pretty much anything and it will give you a smooth surface PROVIDED you sharpen the iron correctly and use the proper technique. most people who use power tools all the time and have never learned how the old fashioned stuff was made to be used are probably wasting their time with planes unless they really want to take the time to get into it. orbital sanders are cheap and a lot easier if you’re going going to thickness and true yr boards by machine too.
I don't particularly fall on either side. They both have their use. One case where I would always scrape rather than sand is tool handles; shovel, rake, axe, hammer, etc.
Once oiled, it has a sturdier feel, grows a lovely natural patina, and it is less likely to cause blistering.
220 grid.... there is no way, can achieve a surface finish like this with a scraper. And..by the way...I am a professional carpenter (by apprenticeship) Greets from Germany.
I never scraped before so i guess you can scrape by without scraping, now sanding , a whole different story..😂
You should make yourself a scraper plane. And out of wood would be perfectly fine. It might be a nice project and a good tool for you to have. It'll work great on erratic grain, be easier on your thumbs and hands, and give a better finish than a hand scraper. You can also make a smoothing plane if you wish.
Thank you.
My experience is pretty much the same. Hitting a spot in the wood where the grain reverses with a plane can be a heartbreaking moment at times.
I'm 4 years late, but I hope my comment will be useful to someone.
I love John Heisz. Full stop. I'm not looking to perform a take-down here, just offer some helpful knowledge.
When John scrapes one side and sands the other, he feels them and considers the sanded side to be much smoother despite the fact that he only uses 220 grit. Scraping with a well burnished scraper leaves an almost perfect surface. There's no way 220 grit is smoother. What's really going on is that this species of wood has natural grain patterns that contain voids. The scraper cuts wood fibers and removes them, leaving that natural structure. But the sander packs sawdust into those voids temporarily making it seem smooth. If he wiped each side with a moist cloth he'd raise all the bent grain on the sanded side and find just how terrible a 220grit sanded wood surface really is.
Next, when he wipes the finish on, we see proof of what I am saying and yet he fails to see it. By the pictures he shows us, the finish soaks into the grain voids (darker sections) of the scraped surface, leaving much contrast between light and dark bands. On the sanded side, there is much less contrast (the light bands are less shiny, and the dark bands are less empty, leaving a visibly more uniform shine). And yet he says visually the two look the same. Totally forgivable mistake. What is interesting is that when he touches those two finished surfaces, his fingers pick up on what my eyes are seeing (and what we know to be happening mechanically with these two wood surfacing technologies). He feels the sanded side, as before, to be much smoother even though his eyes cannot tell the difference.
What's happening is the tung oil is soaking into the dark void bands of the wood grain on the sanded side and leaving both visible snd tactile gullys in the shine. This is why for wood like this you need to make several thin coats. Eventually you end up with both an even shine and beautiful contrast between light and dark sections of the grain.
On the other side, you get a much faster to apply surface treatment and finish, but less beauty from the wood grain. Additionally, over the years the little micro pockets of packed sawdust with age and change differently, and the surface will look less even.
Its definitely a "looks better right more easily right now" sort of thing.
Seems scraping makes less dust. Aren't you supposed to sand the scraped part with 220 by hand too?
Interesting, I was wondering why you scraped for as long as you did and removed as much material as you did, given the starting point was a "surface planer". Hard to tell from the video, but to me, it looked like the amount of material removed was not uniform over the full width of the board. But, let us put that aside.
I use both sanding and scraping, but I do prefer scraping due to the dust issue and some other reasons.
If dust, noise, mess, and cost are not of concern, I use sanding to get something relatively flat, I will use it on some timbers where the finish is not quite as dependent on technique and finishing material, this includes most (botanically designated) softwoods and a lot of boring hardwoods. Depending on the circumstances, I might even use it on some interesting hardwoods to get the surface flat, but then follow it up with a fine scape. End grain, things like cutting boards, sanding is usually fine, although depending on the wood, scrapers can work equally well.
So why scraping after sanding? For some timbers, especially those that can give a "woolly" surface (usually, relatively soft hardwoods), I find scraping gives a better overall appearance, however, sometimes the best appearance can be obtained directly from a hand plane. I generally don't end up with a tear- out problem as by the time I get to the finishing stage I have a good understanding of the particular pieces of wood I am using either by knowing the species, inspecting it carefully, or just the experience of working it with the odd testing on offcuts.
Okay, I have procrastinated long enough, but first, a qualifier, for quality woods, and where possible, I use shellac-based, French polish as a finish usually (but not always) worked to a high gloss finish. On woods such as Australian Red Cedar (Toona ciliata, aka Cedrela toona, aka Toona Australis - a member of the mahogany family), especially the heartwood of older trees, the appearance of the timber is affected by how cleanly the individual fibres at the surface end. On small pieces, a very sharp hand plane (the only one worth using) gives the cleanest cut, the scraper second, and sandpaper last. Despite the negative effect on the longevity of the finish, I use no filler on this timber and build up a fairly thick body. The high albedo and natural lustre of this timber shines through and contrasts strongly with those fibres that reflect at a different angle, giving an illusion of great depth. Also, the wood has a very pronounced chatoyant appearance in direct sunlight. Sanding seems to leave "broken or frayed" end to the fibers rather than a clean cut, and thus less definition "and life" to the grain pattern. A secondary issue is that due to the contrary nature of this timber, sandpaper does not create a flat finish without a lot of sanding withvery fine grades, the difference in hardness between adjacent fibres and the prominent pores being the culprit.
I usually don't get ridges in my scraping as I use a very fine (small) burr for finishing, I also lap the scraper edge to a high polish before burnishing, and I don't put much bow or pressure on it.
Other things:
I use scrapers for levelling French polish between coats, this is done with a very fine burr, the scraper is used straight and pulled forward rather than pushed away. This is faster than sandpaper, doesn't get clogged, lasts quite some time before resharpening, and costs nothing. I do not think this is common practice.
From the above, the cost of a scraper is essentially zero, never runs out of consumables, okay it gets smaller, but it is not going to surprise you. Sandpaper, good stuff gets expensive, gets damaged if you are clumsy (I have a tendency to lose some of my focus with a sander), gets clogged by finishes and in some cases natural oils and waxes from certain raw timbers. Cheaper sandpaper tends to be less uniform and can leave deep scratches that take considerable time to remove in later sanding stages.
I can and have shaped scrapers to smooth out curves, mouldings, sliding dovetailes, and corners both two-sided and the accursed three-sided corner, all without working across the grain. Three-sided corners are just painful with sandpaper.
Then there are the sanding scratches and swirls that aren't detected until after the first coat of oil or finish has been applied. The waiting time until a freshly applied pure Tung oil first coat can be sanded back to remove swirls and scratches without instantly clogging the paper?
Power orbitals are dusty and noisy, especially on drawers, hollow carcasses, etc. And after a while, all that vibration seems to affect the nerves in my hands, and they go numb.
A number of people have come to me to fix a problem in their finely sanded surface (or after the first coat of finish which can be even worse, especially an oiled one) where they have picked up the wrong sander or forgotten to change back to a fine paper after changing to a course one, net result, deep circular scratches. I use a hand scraper with a fine burr to remove the scratches and blend the surface until the defects can't be detected.
I am sure I can come up with some other stuff if I think about it hard enough. >>;-)>
I believe the real 'argument' for scraper is to keep the shine (chatoyance ?) Sanding is abrasive, scraping is a cut makes a difference on some exotics. Smooth wasn't the main goal, thick finish. It's a specialty thing.
Which is better? The one I can get you to do and I don't have to.
The one that gets me to the fridge faster for a cold one :)
@@IBuildIt it's some hot ones we need here right now, frickin freezing clearing the drive this morning.
@Woodworking Tips and Tricks Precisely. :)
Good my brother 👌👌💖👌🇮🇳 🇮🇳
All true John👍
You remind me of Randy Savage from “Savage Garage”
There is a not writed rule that say if something works for you dont let anybody tell you the contrary.
But honestly when i knew the scraper i did not sand again. I dont know how do you sharp your scrapers, but i use 12k stone and a make the bur as usual, my woods feels like ivory(not the wood jejeje)
I think people prefer scraping because the grain feels more like natural smooth wood and the grain looks to have more clarity before finishing. After finishing, I think its a moot point.
I believe you
Could you compare the scraper to a specific grit of sand paper?
Cant argue with Empirical data.
It's a much simpler choice if, like me, you aren't very good at scraping.
Most people don't know how to set up a scraper. It's got to be straightened and burnished to put a proper edge on it. You can tell the scraper in this video is not burnished. It's making dust instead of wispy curls of wood.
That's not a dig at John. My scraper isn't set up properly either. That's a 2020 goal.
Anyone can use sandpaper. It's fast , easy and economical.
Perfectly said and great observation on the sharpness of the scraper, its dull.
All scrapers produce stuff that looks like dust in the first few strokes, since it's working on an uneven surface. But after it gets going, shavings come off. I was pushing the shavings out of view in the video, but you can clearly see them in the clip where I'm working on the side of the mallet, or go back and look at the video where I made the scraper.
Setting up a scraper isn't magic - it takes just a few minutes.
Just bought I cabinet scraper thinking I could save time leveling a table top I’m working on. Jesus Christ was I wrong the thing takes way longer plus you have to sharpen ever ten minutes. Not to mention it’s basically burnishing the wood. What a piece of gatbage
I've decided not to sand or scrape ever again. Going to train one of my grand kids (or all 5)in the art and set them up in their own work space to handle that tedious step from now on.
Put them to work, Kip :)
Please explain the reason for the last handsanding step?
I always thought that a random orbital sander left less visible pattern due to the randomness than manual repetitive pattern.
This is not criticism, but a question, I trust your experience more than my limited knowledge.
Most machine sanders do leave a pattern and that can be fixed by hand sanding with the grain.
@@IBuildIt Thank you for the quick reply, I will try it out the next time I've finished a project!
Decided to find the name change for the channel. Interesting. Logo is good. Now let's talk audio even with our hearing loss. Pioneer HPM-40/60's were amazing. Low power but super efficiency. For simple 3/4 way drivers....; well amazing. I have the networks here if you would care to review them and I have my original 1972 HPM-40's with cloth .... not foam.... Woofer drivers in pretty much 92% aesthetic condition for your review. My new.... 3 years ago ....Cerwin Vega's with 15 inch woofers.. Crap. They sound like MUD above 10 watts... barely past low background noise. Call Write Say Hello. Love all your channels.
The scraped Side is a lot shinie... It is obvius in your pictures.
No,No,NO, this is NOT how to conduct this experiment. Just stuff your "this side feels smoother" bee ess.
😃👍🏻👊🏻
Hi, i wanted to comment on another one of your videos (How to make straight cuts with an angle grinder) but you disabled comments. I wanted to let you know that the information you put out about not using the guard is extremely dangerous and can likely lead to someone being injured. The guard is not just there for keeping your finger away from the disk, but also to provide some safety, along with the rest of your ppe, should the disk explode. As a welder i have seen too many injuries revolving around angle grinders and have gone through many injuries also involving the angle grinder. Is it a bit excessive to comment about it on an different video? Honestly i don’t think so, angle grinders are dangerous tools in the sense that it is hand held and also spins a disk capable of cutting steel well over 1500 rpms. I beg you please turn on comments and leave a disclaimer or rectify it somehow before someone gets hurt.
If you have neither sandpaper or a plane, can you use a *helicopter?!* _< rimshot >_
: