Post a picture of what's on your bench?

[soliver]

First coat of varnish.

[Eric Oliver]

That's beautiful, Dave. Too good-looking to be a 'Frau Bluecher', and too symmetrical for 'Eyegor'...

Although...there does seem to be a pronounced spinal process showing.

It is a fine looking mandolin.

[Paul Statman]

Here's the photo of the 2nd CF shell. You can see that there is a CF stiffener in the center of the neck shaft, and that some excess was cut off both ends of the other one.

Dave, have you considered using the new generation of Rubner tuners? I have found them to be greatly superior to their previous marque.

[Dave Cohen]

The tuners on this mandolin are Rubners, bought recently. Luxury nickel w/ ebony buttons, which is the combination I like. They were on sale. I haven't paid attention to newer vs older. What I would really like from Rubner and/or any other tuner manufacturer would be significantly lower tuner mass. And that is especially true when I am making necks tha are both so much lighter and so much stiffer than conventional necks. Heavy tuners don't negate the stiffness advantage of a CF/composite neck, but they do partially detract from the lower mass advantage.

I also have some concern about the Rubner "Moldflon" bearing surfaces on the worms. The "Moldflon, is presumably teflon, aka PTFE. PTFE is a PFAS (Per- or Poly Fluoro Alkyl Substance), dubbed "forever substances". It's not a huge concern in the case of bearing surfaces, due to the small total amount of PTFE on a set of tuner worms. In non-stick cook pans, the PTFE used gives rise to PFOA (perfluoro octanoic acid) and PFOS (perfluoro octane sulfonic acid). Those two, along with other micro plastics, are showing up in water, in soil, and even in the air. So the main concern with teflon coated tuner worms is end-of-life disposal. I asked the Rubner guy one time if there were any concerns about wear of the moldflon bearing surfaces, and he was quick to assert that they are long-wearing. I guess time will tell.

[PT66]

Dave Cohen, why aluminum bolt and barrel nut? Weight reduction? I have been using basically the same neck attachment method for the last few years but with steel bolt and nut. Works very well.

[Dave Cohen]

I'm sure your steel bolt and barrel nut works very well. However, the aluminum version also "works very well". Aluminum has a density of ~2.70 g/cm3, whereas iron has a density of ~7.88 g/cm3. Steel (mostly iron) thus has almost 3x as much mass per unit volume as does aluminum. So if I am going to the trouble to make a composite neck that is both so much stiffer and so much lighter than a conventional wood neck, why would I then add back ~3x as much mass with a steel bolt and steel barrel nut? Btw, I have used the aluminum bolt and barrel nut combination in some guitars and a couple of archtop guitars and an archtop guitar shaped liuto (i.e., a 5-course mandocello). I used two bolts and barrel nuts apiece in those larger instruments. No failures so far.

[PT66]

I wasn’t questioning your ability to build reliable instruments. As a retired journeyman machinist I am aware of the weight difference between aluminum and steel. I am also aware that there is plenty of thread engagement to create a secure joint. Just confirming that it is the weight that influenced your decision.

[Timbofood]

These came off this week!

[Charles E.]

Well since we have strayed from mandolins, here is the current canoe at the Heritage Boatworks at the St Augustine Lighthouse...

A "Bob's Special", 15 ft tandem canoe with white cedar and mahogany (so far).

[Timbofood]

I can take a thread off course faster that a jackrabbit can make love!

[Dusepo]

Recently completed this colascione and medieval lute:

[TheMandoKit]

Recently completed this colascione and medieval lute:

Beautiful work, as usual. I am really loving the rosette on the lute!

[PT66]

Jo, you do fascinating work. I would love to visit your shop. Unfortunately that is not likely. Keep up the great work.

[Paul Statman]

Recently completed this colascione and medieval lute:

Beautiful work.