# Leg Vise Question



## OleGrump (Jun 16, 2017)

I'm asking this question in THIS forum, because many of the others A) Have no knowledge of hand tool and workbench relationships, their machines work the wood, not them and B) Have expressed an inherent dislike for the leg vise, just because some fancy, "trendy" magazine tells them which vise is "in" nowadays.
In many of the vintage leg vises I have seen, whether in person, in books and on line, the movable jaw is several inches shorter than the fixed jaw. One would understand some variance due to decades of dragging across shop floors being opened and closed constantly, but these examples show a difference sometimes of about six inches or more. It's not like these jaws were all cut this short later in their lives, they all appear to have been made this way purposely.
Not having a fancy degree to interfere with my thinking, it seems that the wider you open a jaw made like this the greater the "slop" will be. OK, I have heard "old timers" talk about putting blocks under the front jaw to keep it level, but why should they have to go through that headache? It just seems like an unnecessary extra step which only creates more trouble when you're clamping stuff in the vise to me
If any of y'all have any input or ideas on why this design should be, please share them, as I'd be most interested in hearing them.


----------



## Ocelot (Mar 6, 2011)

A picture would help.


----------



## bondogaposis (Dec 18, 2011)

I'm not sure what you are getting at here. I don't really think that it would be a good idea to have the bottom of the leg vise chop contact the floor. Mine is several inches above the floor, the parallel leg glide takes care of the slop.


----------



## SMP (Aug 29, 2018)

My guess is the first time a guy opened it up and smashed his toe, he grabbed his panel saw and cut the bottom off just below the parallel guide. Just like the first guy that made kitchen cabinets cut off the bottom after stubbing his toe. I've seen a benchcrafted criss cross leg vise where it was almost a foot off the ground.


----------



## HokieKen (Apr 14, 2015)

In my case, the fixed jaw is the leg of my bench. The only reason I can see that I would have extended the movable jaw any longer would be to increase clamping force by moving the parallel guide further from the screw or to increase capacity by moving the screw and the parallel guide lower. However, I have plenty of capacity and clamping force as it is and if either one were lower, using the vise would be far less ergonomic. Just my thoughts (if I understood what you're asking correctly).


----------



## chriscarter (Feb 24, 2018)

A picture would be great. I think you might be mistaking something else for a leg vise. There's no "fixed" jaw - the inner face is the actual bench itself. The screw and guide at the bottom should prevent any significant sag.


----------



## OleGrump (Jun 16, 2017)

Not ALL vintage leg vises were built as an integral part of the workbench itself. In the late 1800s and early 1900s, it seems to have been just as common for someone to make a separate leg vise from two boards, the rear one having the nut mortised into it, and the front one having the screw and handle attached to it. The builder would then screw or bolt the rear board jaw a whatever point along the bench they found expedient, and screw the front jaw into it once in position. There are several examples of such separately made vises currently listed for sale on Ebay. (Some of them carry a pretty reasonable price tag and shipping costs, BTW)
Also, not all of the parallel adjustment beams were rigidly fixed. Some were made to pivot up, and lowered onto a bolt through the rear jaw once whatever notch needed was aligned. This system would not provide any support to the front jaw. It would however, allow the worker to flip the beam up with his foot while he adjusted the jaw. That would leave both hands free to hold and clamp material in the vise.
Under these circumstances, one would think the front jaw would be a bit longer, not necessarily full length, but a bit longer. Perhaps a block of the proper height to correct this slop was kept in the bench at the ready.


----------



## Smitty_Cabinetshop (Mar 26, 2011)

My leg vise chop reaches the floor. And I like it that way / have not experienced difficulty having it so.


----------



## OleGrump (Jun 16, 2017)

Perhaps the answer to this design enigma lies in the fact that these leg vises were probably made by Farmer Brown, Anytown, USA, with a mail order bench screw. He would have built his leg vise as an entirely separate entity and attached it to whatever he was using as a workbench. If the "bench" fell into disrepair, or if Farmer Brown had to move to another farm, it was easy to remove his complete vise and reattach it somewhere else. Then, as now, the bench screw was the most vital and often most expensive part of a workbench.
Farmer Brown would have only used this vise to make or repair whatever was needed as needed, and not as regularly as would a jointer or cabinetmaker. Therefore, whatever slop there may have been in his vise would not have been much of a bother to him. It worked to do what he needed, and that's all that concerned him.


----------



## theoldfart (Sep 9, 2011)

Like Smitty, my chop is just off the floor by less than an inch. It was 1/4" off the floor but I needed to get the floor mat under neath it. There has been no noticeable sag in the last four years or so.









I use a St. Peter's Cross rather than a parallel guide so no need to make the bottom end accessible.


----------



## SMP (Aug 29, 2018)

> Perhaps the answer to this design enigma lies in the fact that these leg vises were probably made by Farmer Brown, Anytown, USA, with a mail order bench screw. He would have built his leg vise as an entirely separate entity and attached it to whatever he was using as a workbench. If the "bench" fell into disrepair, or if Farmer Brown had to move to another farm, it was easy to remove his complete vise and reattach it somewhere else. Then, as now, the bench screw was the most vital and often most expensive part of a workbench.
> Farmer Brown would have only used this vise to make or repair whatever was needed as needed, and not as regularly as would a jointer or cabinetmaker. Therefore, whatever slop there may have been in his vise would not have been much of a bother to him. It worked to do what he needed, and that s all that concerned him.
> 
> - OleGrump


Possibly. Another guess is that it looks like it originally just copied the old blacksmith's post vise(sometimes also called a leg vise). Just made it look similar but out of wood instead of steel.


----------



## Delete (May 19, 2017)

Here is a plan for what farmer Brown's vise might have looked like. Mr. Brown was very innovative though, he came up with the idea of the scissor leg vise to support and keep the legs parallel. It also allowed him to raise the legs off the floor without loosing any support and totally avoiding the sliding bar and locking dowel methods used back then to keep things parallel.










The idea was posted in a 1920,s Popular Mechanics Shop Notes. Their are expensive commercially available models nowadays. I chose to build my own, with a few improvements such as bearings on the lower sliding arms of the scissors for smoother operation.










The blacksmiths leg vise is different. The movable leg almost never reaches the floor (I have pictures of at least one exception), but rather pivots at a fixed point usually 2/3 of the way to the floor. Here is an example.










If your interested here is a link to an easy, but very heavy build plan, of a similar acting blacksmiths leg vise.

https://hobbyworkshopprojects.blogspot.com/search/label/blacksmith%20vise


----------



## donwilwol (May 16, 2011)

Like most, I don't really understand the question either. Post some pictures of what you're trying to show us.


----------



## OleGrump (Jun 16, 2017)

OK, we'll try a little different approach. The object in this picture is called a leg vise
















!
People who do things with wood use it to hold wood from moving around. This one was made a really long time ago, about 1900. Sometimes, these are built right into a workbench. This one was made as a separate piece, and was held on to the workbench with bolts through the two (2) holes in the back board. You can see these in the picture:









The handle on the front board lets you turn a screw which moves back and forth to hold wood of different sizes. If you look at the first picture, you will see that the front board is shorter than the back board. The long metal piece sticking through the board near the bottom does two things:1. Acts as lever to help the vise hold things tight, and 2) keeps the front board from bending too much when you put wide pieces of wood in the vise. Sometimes these are held tight to the front board. This one moves UP and DOWN on a bolt and hooks over another bolt in the back board to keep in different places, for big or little pieces of wood. If the metal piece near the bottom on the front board was held tight and could not move, the front board could move back and forth easily. But we just said that the metal piece on this vise (and a whole lot of other ones made about the same time) is not held tight it moves up and down.
That means, when you turn the big handle on the front, and the board moves out toward you, it gets heavy and starts to drop down toward the floor. (by "Gravity") If whoever made this leg vise had made the front board almost as long as the back board, the front one would NOT drop down so far as it does with the shorter board. To use this vise the best, you have to either HOLD the front board UP while you make it tight, OR put another block of wood UNDER the front board to keep it from falling down.
The question for the class is why would someone put a short board on the front, knowing that it will fall down when it is opened toward him?


----------



## donwilwol (May 16, 2011)

My assumption would be it's the same reason you put a toe kick on cabinets. Move the vise out holding a 12" piece and you couldn't stand in front of it without straddling it.


----------



## Delete (May 19, 2017)

+ 1 Don W

If you are putting the question to the class, that indicates you already know the answer, but that is not so clear in your explanation. The main reason for the toothed bottom bar is to keep the two legs parallel so that you can maximize clamping surface contact at the jaws. The toothed bar works with a ratchet effect and many of these designs have a latch mounted under the bench to disengage the toothed bar for adjustment. This keeps the legs parallel and gives some support to the moving leg, though not very well for this design. In my opinion the scissor design is the best and cleanest, design solution for both problems.

Countless designs have been tried over the centuries since the leg vise came into use to get around this problem. You only need to do a search to come up with many examples. Here is an extreme version built by Klaus Kiefer:










In the two blacksmith examples above the movable jaw adjusts on a pivot to maximize clamping and get around the parallel problem.

A adjustable leg that goes to the floor is a toe stubbing, and tripping hazard, and nowadays a pinching hazard for portable power tool cords.


----------



## Smitty_Cabinetshop (Mar 26, 2011)

> A adjustable leg that goes to the floor is a toe stubbing, and tripping hazard, and nowadays a pinching hazard for portable power tool cords.
> 
> - CarlosInTheSticks


Three problems I've never had, not even once, in over 8 years of leg vising. I'll never stand in the way of anyone feeding an urge to overthink and over engineer, but in the case of leg vises I won't ever say it's needed, either.

Respectfully Submitted, etc. etc..


----------



## HokieKen (Apr 14, 2015)

> Three problems I ve never had, not even once, in over 8 years of *leg vising*. I ll never stand in the way of anyone feeding an urge to overthink and over engineer, but in the case of leg vises I won t ever say it s needed, either.
> 
> Respectfully Submitted, etc. etc..
> 
> - Smitty_Cabinetshop


Ha! I never knew that was a verb ) I like that and will be adding it to my vocabulary from this day forward.


----------



## Smitty_Cabinetshop (Mar 26, 2011)

Glad you like it, Kenny!


----------



## ADN (Sep 20, 2016)

Have to agree with Smitty, mine goes to the floor by design, can chop mortises right in the leg vise if desired.

I've even clamped some framework in the bottom on occasion. After several years of use, I'd build the same again.










Regards,
Andy


----------



## theoldfart (Sep 9, 2011)

Can't say i've ever tripped or stubbed a toe on mine as well. Never even gave it a thought when I planned mine out.

Edit: What are " portable power tool cords."?


----------



## Delete (May 19, 2017)

> Have to agree with Smitty, mine goes to the floor by design, can chop mortises right in the leg vise if desired.
> 
> Regards,
> Andy
> ...


So my internet provider has been down since Sunday afternoon. Looks like I need to respond here, though I feel guilty, like I am usurping OleGrumps thread. To each his own, though if your going to use the leg vise for heavy vertical blows such as in chopping mortises, your design will certaily take the impacts without damaging your parallel mechanism.

Love all the options you incorporated in that great looking bench ADN.



> Can t say i ve ever tripped or stubbed a toe on mine as well. Never even gave it a thought when I planned mine out.
> 
> Edit: What are " portable power tool cords."?
> 
> - theoldfart


Stubbing toes and tripping is definitly a hazard for me when concentrating on close work to the bench with hand tools. It seems history sides with me. If you don't use portable power tools then you don't need to worry about power cords.


----------



## donwilwol (May 16, 2011)

I put a big old cast iron wheel as a handle. It eliminates the tripping hazard.


----------



## ADN (Sep 20, 2016)

Carlos:

Thanks for the compliments…...

My leg vise has Benchcrafted hardware, it's almost 14 inches wide at top and there is very little racking, < 1/8" or so.

Really like the leg vise, and would certainly include it in any bench I built. However my most used vise is the Lie Nielsen Tail vise, it's amazing how many uses one can find for it.

Regards,
Andy


----------



## Smitty_Cabinetshop (Mar 26, 2011)

> It seems history sides with me.
> 
> - CarlosInTheSticks


If we agree Roubo is history, his chop went to the floor too.


----------



## Delete (May 19, 2017)

> It seems history sides with me.
> 
> - CarlosInTheSticks
> 
> ...


Maybe you uploaded the wrong picture, thats a picture of the bench top, not the floor. I also said "to each his own" I am sure there are many examples where the adjustable leg goes to the floor but by far the most examples are of the shortened adjustable leg with parallel and support mechanisms, even more so with modern versions, with commercial versions available as well as the shop built examples.

I can understand how a leg would go to the floor if your going to do heavy vertical work in the leg vise, such as ADN above, but your bench top or other vise types are better designed for that type of work. I don't think I need to go into the reasons why a woodworkers leg vise is not well suited for this kind of work. The blacksmiths style vise gets around these problems and will take heavy vertical blows without the workpiece slipping or damage to the vise.


----------



## Smitty_Cabinetshop (Mar 26, 2011)

Maybe you don't understand the plate. But that's okay.


----------



## Delete (May 19, 2017)

Haha I have never been credited with a deep level of understanding, but your right, thats okay haha.


----------



## Delete (May 19, 2017)

> If we agree Roubo is history, his chop went to the floor too.
> 
> - Smitty_Cabinetshop


Fortunately the 10,000 or so volumes on my shelves help me understand. I was sure I had seen your picture of Popular Woodworkings poor reproduction of the Roubo bench picture before. Sure enough I found it in Scott Landis's book "The Workbench Book" published by Taunton Press.










As you can see in the picture the leg vise was an optional after thought on Roubo's part. An unrefined first of. It did not have a garter, good thing it was on the floor or you could spin it like a propeller. There was nothing to keep it parallel so you were left to place a scrap the same thickness as your work, between the bottom of the leg and the workbench. I could see that being a pain in the butt. Roubo's main methods of securing the work were the hook stop and holdfasts. The leg was on the floor because it had to be until someone could refine the idea.

Rob Tarule did a reproduction of Roubo's bench and Scott Landis recorded it in his book. Over the course of a couple of centuries Rob was one of many, no doubt, who made some improved changes to Roubos leg vise, or chops.










50 years after Roubo, the Shakers were going strong in America, they developed some huge and very envious workbenches and the refinement of Roubo's leg vise reached levels that are still used today. As I mentioned "to each his own" and they were not all shortened legs but most of them were. Mine resembles some of their designs. You will find lots of pictures of benches with the shortened leg design in Scott's book.










Notice where his foot is. Hope you liked the history.


----------



## HokieKen (Apr 14, 2015)

To each his own is absolutely right ;-) Like I said before, mine doesn't go to the floor but, it could and it wouldn't bother me. I just didn't see a purpose for it to extend much beyond the parallel guide. If I had used a St. Peters cross or similar in place of the pinned parallel guide, I probably would have placed it lower and made the chop longer. I love my leg vise best of all and see no need to change it. But I don't think being a little longer would make me love her less. Yes, it is a "she". I ain't spreading no man's legs.


----------



## Delete (May 19, 2017)

+ 1 Kenny

May sound sexist but yea all the tools in my shop are "shes", they make for better company in a man cave, lol.


----------



## ADN (Sep 20, 2016)

Have no real interest in arguing, but the leg vise in the plate illustration would not spin, as described in the plate, even if it did not go to the floor.. That caption under the photo is incorrect.

Note that in the plate drawing there is a guide at the bottom just like the one in the photo, it's filled in right above the floor, that in itself would have kept it from spinning.

Don't know the history of garters, so can't comment on that….

Regards,

Andy


----------



## Delete (May 19, 2017)

> Have no real interest in arguing, but the leg vise in the plate illustration would not spin, as described in the plate, even if it did not go to the floor.. That caption under the photo is incorrect.
> 
> Note that in the plate drawing there is a guide at the bottom just like the one in the photo, it's filled in right above the floor, that in itself would have kept it from spinning.
> 
> ...


I am not an arguing hound either, but sometimes they are as attracted to me as the swarms of flies up here right now lol. We can keep it going.

Scott, Tarule, and I all disagree with you. Roubo's leg screw was just inserted through a hole in the leg. Without a garter the leg was free to move along the length of the screw and without a bottom paralleling beam it was free to spin on the screw shaft, resting on the floor would have stopped that or in the closed position the hook stop would have got in the way. And no there was not a guide at the bottom unless Scott, Tarule, and I are reading the plate differently than you. As Scott describes Tarule was using scrap blocks like I mention above until he decided to upgrade the reproduction to 19th century improvements (read Shaker improvements).

Here is an excerpt from "The Workbench Book" with a clearer explanation of what I just mumbled and a drawing of Tarule's upgrades to Roubo's leg vise with a clear example of how the garter works.


----------



## ADN (Sep 20, 2016)

What is that thing at the bottom, between the chop and the leg in the plate? It blocks the white background between the chop and the leg, and it even has a shadow drawn in to make sure it's noticeable? Sure looks like a guide to me.

Like I've already stated, no clue on the history of garters, but they become self evident when one builds a free standing screw vise.

My knowledge is only based on what is common knowledge, books and such, have not done any type studies on woodworking benches, so i'll yield to those who know these things.

One thing for sure, Roubo was famous for drawing and presenting things without any explanation and/or instructions, have thousands of questions when I read his stuff.

Regards,
Andy


----------



## Delete (May 19, 2017)

No that is not a guide that is a piece of scrap to keep the chop parallel as noted by Scott and Tarule. Check the back of the bench leg it does not pass through. But hey it does in the reproduction upgrade with the parallel beam.


----------



## ADN (Sep 20, 2016)

From "Workbenchs, from Design & Theory to Construction & Use" by Christopher Schwarz, 2007 pg 65










According to Roubo even the Germans had leg vise guides…Scott Tarule certainly didn't come up with leg vise guide, they were around in Roubo's time….

Regards,
Andy


----------



## Delete (May 19, 2017)

Please keep the the argument real, nobody said Scott or Tarule came up with anything and I am sure you are aware of that, both Mr. Schwarz and Popular Woodworker got there information from Scotts book which was published before either of those other publications. Roubo came up with a flawed first idea, that is not holding anything against him, IT WAS THE INITIAL IDEA, yes he recorded in his Vol. III plate 279 where the Germans toke his idea and and ran with it coming up with some interesting variations, but what is mostly copied today was the Shaker designs, developed in the early 1800's. So what, where's this going?


----------



## HokieKen (Apr 14, 2015)

Nowhere. We have leg vises. And I love mine  That's the part that concerns me ;-)


----------



## Delete (May 19, 2017)

You got it Kenny, thats how I feel about mine to.


----------



## ADN (Sep 20, 2016)

Your argument was that Roubo era leg vises did not have parallel guides, and that they went to the floor because they didn't have parallel guides, that's obviously incorrect, and the that's the only thing I'm arguing against.

Note that I never said: Tarule claimed to have come up with the parallel guide, I only stated that he did not come up with the concept, or "improvement" as you called it.

My only reason for pointing out that the parallel guide was not a 19th century idea, was directed related to this quote from above:

"….As Scott describes Tarule was using scrap blocks like I mention above until he decided to upgrade the reproduction to 19th century improvements (read Shaker improvements)...."

The parallel guide, is not a 19th century or later upgrade, and obviously not all leg vises went to the floor in Roubo's day.

Regards,
Andy


----------



## Delete (May 19, 2017)

> 1. Your argument was that Roubo era leg vises did not have parallel guides, and that they went to the floor because they didn't have parallel guides, that's obviously incorrect, and the that's the only thing I'm arguing against.
> 
> 2. Note that I never said: Tarule claimed to have come up with the parallel guide, I only stated that he did not come up with the concept, or "improvement" as you called it.
> 
> ...


 1. No someone else brought up Roubo's bench, and I said *Roubo's* bench did not have parallel guides or a garter and it was a good thing it rested on the floor because it would not have worked if it was shortened without further improvements.

2. I didn't claim he came up with them either, he improved Roubo's design with ideas that had been in use for a couple of centuries already.

3. Roubo was not enlightened on the parallel guide, Roubo's volumes were not clear on weather the Germans developed guides or even the shortened leg vise before or after Roubo, there is speculation Swiss and Swedish benches were developed around that time with similar contrivances but little documentation. That left it to the Shakers to refine the previous ideas, I believe the garter was there idea. Very few things are ever invented in there final forms, the idea comes along and then it is refined over time.

And that is all I have said but you seem to be inserting alot of assumptions, to feed your argument, inbetween my lines. I'm good.


----------

