Official Luthiers Forum!

I am thinking of making this jig. It looks like it would work as long as you can maintain the guitar side to surface while using.

https://www.google.com/search?q=guitar+ ... RaSBO-6ysM:

My first jig for cutting binding channels was essentially that (that one probably copied mine).
Do a search for binding jig as the title in the archives and you’ll find several better versions of DIY jigs like that one. Not mine but mine’s in there from 2006 or something...

It works fine and runs on the same principal as several fine purchasable offerings out there.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

_________________
My Facebook Guitar Page

"There's really no wrong way, as long as the results are what's desired." Charles Fox

"We have to constantly remind ourselves what we're doing....No Luthier is putting a man on the moon!" Harry Fleishman

"Generosity is always different in the eye of the person who didn't receive anything, but who wanted some." Waddy Thomson

If the only mechanism for vertical movement are those two Wingnuts, it could potentially be a little frustrating getting the right depth of cut. But should work fine otherwise

New username, same ole Pat Mac

_________________
Pat

Check out forum sponsor Elevate's binding jig

Be advised that the design requires the sides be perfectly leveled as it keys off the whole side. Any irregularities will be transferred to the cut. Any tilting of the jig or of the body if the jig is secured and the body moved can scallop the cut slightly so there is a learning curve.

The tower type jig like StewMac and LMI sell as well as the sliding arm double parallelogram style that use a bit with interchangeable bearings are more forgiving but you are limited to the bearing sizes and replacing router bits is more expensive as well as the expense of buying a bearing set.

Interestingly I have a kid doing a project in my shop that used to work in the binding department of Santa Cruz guitars. He said they used a jig similar to the one you describe or the Elevate jig to cut the binding channel (with the jig fixed to the bench and moving the body) but switched to a tower style jig with a bearing guided router bit for the purfling so as to insure that any little irregularities from the binding cut were corrected.

_________________
It's not what you don't know that hurts you, it's what you do know that's wrong.

I like mine better... It lowers the pucker factor. It's homemade. I borrowed a friend's, took the measurements and made one.

_________________
Steve Sollod (pronounced sorta like "Solid")
www.swiftcreekguitars.com

I'd be pleased to have the articulated arm type like sollod's but lack the space for it. I settled for one much like the Stewmac Tru-channel binding setup, but made one for a fraction of the cost using parts from 80/20 on eBay. I made a width guide that worked well but was difficult to set accurately, so I got a stewmac bearing set. Ten years on, I have no reason to change.

_________________
formerly known around here as burbank
_________________

http://www.patfosterguitars.com

This jig works on the same principle as Steve's above but it has the advantages of being simpler/cheaper to build and it folds up nicely to not take up much space when not in use: viewtopic.php?f=10101&t=19236

_________________
There are three kinds of people:

Those that make things happen,
those that watch things happen,
and those that wondered what happened.

Regardless of what style binding jig you end up using, if you plan on making one yourself, take your time. Binding is one of those tasks that will make or break the aesthetic of the finished instrument. The channels you get from your rig will only be as precise as the tool your using. A quick and dirty jig that's "close enough" will never give you precise channels- resulting in much more work on the tail end to get everything as close as you can.

The style of jig you originally posted (as opposed to the tower/cradle style jigs) is much more forgiving in working with imperfect side geometry. Yes, it will require flat sides- especially with the style guide shown in your post. But it will also follow any change in angle in your sides and still give you a true channel since it designed to cut parallel to your sides rather than perpendicular to the plates. In my (somewhat biased ) opinion, it's well worth learning to use.

_________________
ELEVATE || Next Level Lutherie
http://elevatelutherie.com
&
http://ensorguitars.com

Hey Steve, that setup looks familiar...

I tend to state the obvious, but doing so helps me analyze issues more clearly.

The main weakness of the type of binding jig the OP asked about is this: The thing that determines the depth of cut for the thickness of the binding (I call it the finger, as opposed to the donut, which determines the depth of cut for the height of the binding) must always be exactly perpendicular to the cut in order for the cut to be at maximum depth. If the finger is skewed, then the cut is more shallow than you wanted it to be. And keeping that perpendicularity can be a struggle when you are cutting a curved surface.

Now, there are plenty of shops that cut plenty of binding channels with this type of jig, in spite of that characteristic. So, it can work fine.

However, for me, I find it much easier and more reliable to use a tower setup that relies on concentric bearings to determine the depth of cut for the thickness of the binding. No matter how I orient the guitar in relation to the tower, that depth of cut stays the same.

I've used a similar binding jig to the one originally asked about on this thread since 1974 ... so it works. I'm not saying it's the best ... it can be a tad scary to use at first ... but it has the advantage that it's easy to make and takes up very little space to store in your shop.