perfect, easy canted drill 1st time

[davet]

Revell axle hole tool with #43 bit. Don't use the bit that comes with it. It's too small and wobbles in the holes. The bit used to raise the one side of the block in the tool is a #45. We used a pin vise. I drilled the first one and my son drilled the other side. The clamp is on very lightly. Make sure the #45 bit is tight up against the inside of the tool.
LB's alignment check shows dead on. Hope this helps someone.

 

[Vitamin K]

This sounds like a good idea to share with the dads at our upcoming PWD workshop.

I think the main advantage that, say, something like Goatboy's tool, is that once you clamp the block in there, you're guaranteed that the holes are parallel and aligned. With the method above, you're relying on the block to be square enough.

That said, probably great for cubs!

 

[davet]

I forgot to mention that I did have to fold a post it over twice (4 sheets thick) and place it between the block and one side of the tool to get it square and tight. I left it out of the pics so things were easier to see. You may not need any paper or you may only need one sheet but it has to tight in the tool to keep it from cocking at an angle on you.

We tried this with our first tool we bought yrs ago (steel instead of aluminum) and I can't remember the name of it. Maybe Pro-Body tool. That one had a hole size that no numbered bit would fit tight in. It was an in between size so we tossed it and use this now. Don't use a drill to run it through because the aluminum is easily oblonged by a slight angle of the bit.

 

[DerbyDad4Hire]

The problem you face is when you unclamp and raise the other side you will lose your rear alignment. It might be close but it will almost surely be slightly out of line.

 

[davet]

I found that with the block fit snugly in the tool that it won't slide within the tool with even a good bit of pressure. I unclamped and pulled the bit out from underneath it. I then raised the low side slightly to make it level then pushed the other side down. The block was marked on top and the tool holes were already marked/connected with a line. It never moved off the lines. LB's alignment check shows it good.

I've read a post on here where one member gets his drills perfect only 50% of the time using The Block. That seemed to be common. This is our last year racing scouts and rather than invest and spend time trial and error with The Block this will work. We've bent axles and run very well so if it wasn't perfect we would've just given the axle a slight bend. Didn't need it though.

 

[davet]

I haven't used The Block but from what I've seen it looks like you still have to mark your axle hole locations manually then line up the drill press with those marks. It seems like there may actually be more chance of misalignment that way. The holes in this tool are machined in exactly the same spot and exactly parallel to the tool. Just set the angle with a bit and line up the marks. No walking of the bit as it starts up. Again, I haven't used The Block though.

 

[davet]

This sounds like a good idea to share with the dads at our upcoming PWD workshop.

I think the main advantage that, say, something like Goatboy's tool, is that once you clamp the block in there, you're guaranteed that the holes are parallel and aligned. With the method above, you're relying on the block to be square enough.

That said, probably great for cubs!

I haven't seen Goatboy's tool. Doesn't every tool rely on the bottom being square?

 

[Vitamin K]

This sounds like a good idea to share with the dads at our upcoming PWD workshop.

I think the main advantage that, say, something like Goatboy's tool, is that once you clamp the block in there, you're guaranteed that the holes are parallel and aligned. With the method above, you're relying on the block to be square enough.

That said, probably great for cubs!

I haven't seen Goatboy's tool. Doesn't every tool rely on the bottom being square?

No. One of the ideas behind The Block, or Goatboy's Tool (or even the Revell thing) is that you clamp it on once and then and drill your holes without moving the clamp. Thus, the holes are relative to the shape of the machined jig, as opposed to relying on the angle between the bottom of the block and the perpendicular side to give you the right angle.

Put another way, if you put a slightly warped block into something like the GB tool, the axle holes might be a little bit askew, relative to the bottom of the block, but they'll be perfectly in line with each other.

So, I still like your idea, and I'm glad you shared it. Just pointing out that it can only be as accurate as the squareness of your block.

 

[microbrush]

Davet is a good racer. His son beat mine in the council championship. As has been said what works for one may not work for another. He has his technique down well. Also, using LB alignment check to verify and it checks out, all is good Correct?

 

[Vitamin K]

Davet is a good racer. His son beat mine in the council championship. As has been said what works for one may not work for another. He has his technique down well. Also, using LB alignment check to verify and it checks out, all is good Correct?

Like I said, I like the idea, and I might use it myself, actually.

Since he is verifying the alignment with a proven method, I'd think he's good to go. I was just pointing out one possible source of inconsistencies that could arise.

 

[5KidsRacing]

This sounds like a good idea to share with the dads at our upcoming PWD workshop.

I think the main advantage that, say, something like Goatboy's tool, is that once you clamp the block in there, you're guaranteed that the holes are parallel and aligned. With the method above, you're relying on the block to be square enough.

That said, probably great for cubs!

I haven't seen Goatboy's tool. Doesn't every tool rely on the bottom being square?

No... the Silver Bullet and the GB took don't care about a square wood block. You clamp in your block and then never move the wood block to drill the rears so block shape doesn't matter. The GB tool error can only come with drill bit/bushing slop and to a less extent drill bit wander.... the SB rely's on good technique, good set-up and bit wander happens with heavy grain wood or crappy drill bits... The GB tool is a good straight forward drilling tool for one degree of cant and is a great system... The SB allows you more options on cant angle and other types of drilling for other advanced pwd stuff... both great products... I prefer the SB because I can control more of the process, use it for other types of drilling and I don't like not being able to control that bit/bushing clearance.

and still, by the way, having your drill press table exactly perpendicular to your spindle does not matter with the SB....

The method you show above has too many moves required to get a perfect alignment... that block and your method may win a Cub Scout race, but wouldn't fare well with anybody who uses the SB or GB methods. You would only be lucky to get both rears perfect with that method. Using pins under a block of wood to achieve cant does not work. You cannot place the pins in the exact same position on each side of the block when you drill each side... they may look in the same place and the drill may even look close to your eye (or even when inserting drill rods), but they will not be... and it will be evident at full speed.

 

[GravityX]

Work with what you have at hand and do the very best that you can with it. It appears davet has had a certain level of success with this method. Use it until you start getting beat by others, then change your methods. As you progress through this hobby and look back, you've all been here, you can then reflect back at yourself and the things you have done trying to achieve the proper build and maybe then chuckle at yourself. I know I have. It's all part of the experience of this hobby. See where you've been and know where you are going.

 

[zeebzob]

I just talked about this very thing in my podcast episode 26. I tried this method in my son's 3rd year of scouts way back in 2007 with the pro body tool. That car was a turd.
Glad it works for you though.

 

[Vitamin K]

The method you show above has too many moves required to get a perfect alignment... that block and your method may win a Cub Scout race, but wouldn't fare well with anybody who uses the SB or GB methods. You would only be lucky to get both rears perfect with that method. Using pins under a block of wood to achieve cant does not work. You cannot place the pins in the exact same position on each side of the block when you drill each side... they may look in the same place and the drill may even look close to your eye (or even when inserting drill rods), but they will not be... and it will be evident at full speed.

So, even with the SB (or the GB tool), there are a number of steps of verification required to check that you've got a good drill, right? As davet mentioned in a previous post, some folks have reported success rates as low as 50% when using the Bullet/Block.

So...my question is...would the steps required for verification after the Block/Bullet also not apply to checking for issues with davet's method? That is, if you pass the same post-drill tests, would it be wrong to assume that you haven't gotten comparable results?

 

[5KidsRacing]

The method you show above has too many moves required to get a perfect alignment... that block and your method may win a Cub Scout race, but wouldn't fare well with anybody who uses the SB or GB methods. You would only be lucky to get both rears perfect with that method. Using pins under a block of wood to achieve cant does not work. You cannot place the pins in the exact same position on each side of the block when you drill each side... they may look in the same place and the drill may even look close to your eye (or even when inserting drill rods), but they will not be... and it will be evident at full speed.

So, even with the SB (or the GB tool), there are a number of steps of verification required to check that you've got a good drill, right? As davet mentioned in a previous post, some folks have reported success rates as low as 50% when using the Bullet/Block.

So...my question is...would the steps required for verification after the Block/Bullet also not apply to checking for issues with davet's method? That is, if you pass the same post-drill tests, would it be wrong to assume that you haven't gotten comparable results?

50%? what people? League people? I know people that can't change a light bulb... those people?

 

[Vitamin K]

The method you show above has too many moves required to get a perfect alignment... that block and your method may win a Cub Scout race, but wouldn't fare well with anybody who uses the SB or GB methods. You would only be lucky to get both rears perfect with that method. Using pins under a block of wood to achieve cant does not work. You cannot place the pins in the exact same position on each side of the block when you drill each side... they may look in the same place and the drill may even look close to your eye (or even when inserting drill rods), but they will not be... and it will be evident at full speed.

So, even with the SB (or the GB tool), there are a number of steps of verification required to check that you've got a good drill, right? As davet mentioned in a previous post, some folks have reported success rates as low as 50% when using the Bullet/Block.

So...my question is...would the steps required for verification after the Block/Bullet also not apply to checking for issues with davet's method? That is, if you pass the same post-drill tests, would it be wrong to assume that you haven't gotten comparable results?

50%? what people? League people? I know people that can't change a light bulb... those people?

I could actually be mis-remembering.

My question still stands though. Everybody verifies their alignment post-drill. So my question is: would a test that catches mis-alignment on a job drilled with the Block/GB tool also catch mis-alignment on a job done with an alternate method?

 

[5KidsRacing]

The method you show above has too many moves required to get a perfect alignment... that block and your method may win a Cub Scout race, but wouldn't fare well with anybody who uses the SB or GB methods. You would only be lucky to get both rears perfect with that method. Using pins under a block of wood to achieve cant does not work. You cannot place the pins in the exact same position on each side of the block when you drill each side... they may look in the same place and the drill may even look close to your eye (or even when inserting drill rods), but they will not be... and it will be evident at full speed.

So, even with the SB (or the GB tool), there are a number of steps of verification required to check that you've got a good drill, right? As davet mentioned in a previous post, some folks have reported success rates as low as 50% when using the Bullet/Block.

So...my question is...would the steps required for verification after the Block/Bullet also not apply to checking for issues with davet's method? That is, if you pass the same post-drill tests, would it be wrong to assume that you haven't gotten comparable results?

50%? what people? League people? I know people that can't change a light bulb... those people?

I could actually be mis-remembering.

My question still stands though. Everybody verifies their alignment post-drill. So my question is: would a test that catches mis-alignment on a job drilled with the Block/GB tool also catch mis-alignment on a job done with an alternate method?

I am sure you are not mis-remembering... I know where it came from... it came from somebody who had no intentions of making it work.

and by the way I am not bashing you VK... I like your presence on these boards which I have said before... Laserman take note...

I think the roll back and forward test & wheel migration tests are good preliminary tests.... I like the tests with the square and pulling a car down a tuning board that I saw in a Bulldog video.... I know someone else came up with that idea... great idea..

I think the only true test is racing the car full speed on a track though... so that is my answer.

 

[Vitamin K]

I could actually be mis-remembering.

My question still stands though. Everybody verifies their alignment post-drill. So my question is: would a test that catches mis-alignment on a job drilled with the Block/GB tool also catch mis-alignment on a job done with an alternate method?

I am sure you are not mis-remembering... I know where it came from... it came from somebody who had no intentions of making it work.

and by the way I am not bashing you VK... I like your presence on these boards which I have said before... Laserman take note...

I think the roll back and forward test & wheel migration tests are good preliminary tests.... I like the tests with the square and pulling a car down a tuning board that I saw in a Bulldog video.... I know someone else came up with that idea... great idea..

I think the only true test is racing the car full speed on a track though... so that is my answer.

No worries. Nothing you said sounded like bashing.

Interesting, though. I know that all tests are just proxies for how the car will behave on a track. And one thing that's really hard to replicate in a testing environment is velocity.

I had an idea once for a sling-shot powered wobble test on a 10 foot strip...but probably best not to revisit that... /images/boards/smilies/wink.gif

 

[CivilWarTalk]

Just a note on using the silver bullet, I think if you use the right technique with a proper fence and stop on your drill press, the method will give you a 90%+ success rate, I've drilled 10+ cars and the silver bullet has never failed to drill proper rears. I'm using a cheap harbor freight drill press, so I expected problems, but the silver bullet seems to mitigate errors. I used this video to plan my own fence and stop on my press:

[video]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jlwQfL0cOiE[/video]

 

[5KidsRacing]

Totally agree CivilWarTalk! well said...

I drilled 72 blocks a couple weeks ago and they all checked out good... no problems.