Work benches...

[Sam_Jack]

Bench heights.

I fully realise it is a very personal thing; however, back in the day, when men turned up to work in a ‘workshop’ – was there a prescription for ‘bench height’? A standard, if you like or was it just accept the bench you were allocated and make the best of it?

The very first bench I made, stand in the workshop, robust, solid and much used, only now it serves as a ‘sharpening’ station – grinder bolted on, mechanics vice etc. All there to make sharpening up easy and quick. But, it is far too low for joinery. My ‘big’ bench was built when I was almost full grown and has served me well. I have watched the Sellars ‘bench’ build with some interest, not that I intend to build one. No way; but I wonder how many have spent there hard earned, lowed up for the lumber, put countless hours of careful work into building a bench which don’t suit? Not knocking Sellars – not at all – but I thought it would be nice to find a ‘rule-of-thumb’ which worked back in the day when you signed on and were allocated a bench – like it or lump it.

Just a stray thought – 4x2 Spruce ain’t that ‘cheap and a too high or too low bench is counterproductive and disappointing. Just curious is all.

 

[MikeG.]

A bench that's too high isn't any sort of problem to a man with a saw.

 

[Brandlin]

I'm 1.93m (6'4"). So tall, but not extremely so.

I have a problem with everything from bus/train/aircraft seats to desk heights. Admittedly its exacerbated by a bad back from playing rugby.

For the times I spent working in a workshop the heights always gave me problems. Technically the employers should have done something about it but the reality is its easy to provide someone with an adjustable office chair and computer station, but much harder to do so in a workshop environment (but not impossible).

All my work surfaces in my workshop are raised to the height of a kitchen workbench.

In much of the youtube catalogue of bench builds there is little attention paid to biomechanics at all, let alone height specifically. Some of them look very odd to me - more about aesthetics than practical use. To be fair to sellars he does talk about making the legs overlong and then cutting them to suit.

 

[Phil Pascoe]

The point was made long ago that in the past much bigger timbers were worked by hand so the benches were lower, enabling the worker to get his bodyweight over the workpiece. This was also when men tended to be shorter as well. I would tell anyone to make theirs a few inches higher than they think they need - it might just turn out more comfortable than thought, and as Mike said - it's no problem for a man with a saw. Besides which you can always stand on something to get up to a bench that's a little high more easily than you can raise the height of one that's too low.

 

[Tasky]

Something else to note is that in Ye Olde Dayes, people used big wooden planes that had handles on top of a big block of wood. Modern plane handles are, what, a mere ¼" above the sole of the plane? That's several inches difference, already...

In addition, as pointed out, folk were a mite shorter back then.

Also, even a lightweight plane properly sharpened and set will still shave without any downward pressure beyond its own weight. Videos on YouTube prove this. You just add a touch extra weight and mainly use your hands to direct the plane.
So when you see people advocating really low benches with some justification about being able to bear their full bodyweight down onto the plane, or because that's how high the old ones used to be, give that some consideration.

Personally low surfaces absolutely KILL my back within minutes. I can't even do the washing up at a standard height sink.
I like my benches to be around belt height, but I also have arms like a gibbon and shanks to match, so a nice high bench for me.

But as mentioned, make yours overly long and trim it to suit.

 

[thetyreman]

38 inches is what my bench height is, I am 5 foot 11 and a 15/16ths and it feels just right.

 

[Phil Pascoe]

Mine's 37" and I'm (was, until my legs were chopped off ) 5'10", It's irrelevant now, but I'd not have wanted it any lower.

 

[Jacob]

Depends what you are doing but 30" to 40" should cover it.
Its handy to have the legs on blocks so you can lower it when necessary.

 

[DBT85]

My bench is based on Sellers latest design. Those plans call for it to stand at 38" or 97cm high.

At a mere 6'1" I often find that any working surface is too low for me to work at for too long and so I've cut my legs I think 50mm long so that I can cut it down if I feel the need.

Standard kitchen worktops would be 90cm, though there is usually some deviation as the legs on cabinets can go up and down. I think mine are 91cm.

 

[stuartpaul]

......I can't even do the washing up at a standard height sink......

30 plus years of marriage and that one still works for me!!!

Many years ago there would have been a british standard for such things and if you didn’t fit then tough luck.

Thankfully we now know far more about the ergonomic issues that go with life and would be advising people to make sure ‘it’ fits them.

My bench is quite a lot above ‘average’ because of back issues and at least one other woodworker I know finds it very uncomfortable to use for any length of time.

 

[Paul200]

I'm 1.93m (6'4"). So tall, but not extremely so.

I'm 5'8" - are you trying to rub it in pal?! :roll: :wink:

 

[Sam_Jack]

S’funny you should say that Jacob, I do in fact have a ‘set’ of blocks, 30, 60 and 90 mm, with fences to prevent inconvenience (and curses). Taught to do it many years ago – but; it’s not a thing I do often (shiftless/lazy etc). When I restored the armoire, it was worth the effort – dropped the bench about three inches as the armoire sides were seriously high. I could. I suppose, have fetched a box and paddled about the bench all day on that; but for the sake of what; five minutes – I could work comfortably. Is that the trick I wonder?

I read of folk who have problems cutting straight and square – I wonder how much of this is caused by discomfort (for wont of better) or; not being positioned correctly to cut ‘square’. It is as much about foot work, stance and balance = as we know, but getting the lumber into just the right, comfortable position for ‘sighting’ is not often mentioned. I believe you must be relaxed to allow the saw to ‘float’ or the chisel to remain vertical. You cannot do this if you are off balance or discomforted. Which I why I was curious about the influence of the bench top on not only the biometrics of doing the job, but doing it ‘without’ sweat.

As said – just curious.

 

[Jacob]

........

I read of folk who have problems cutting straight and square – I wonder how much of this is caused by discomfort (for wont of better) or; not being positioned correctly to cut ‘square’. It is as much about foot work, stance and balance = as we know, but getting the lumber into just the right, comfortable position for ‘sighting’ is not often mentioned. I believe you must be relaxed to allow the saw to ‘float’ or the chisel to remain vertical. You cannot do this if you are off balance or discomforted. Which I why I was curious about the influence of the bench top on not only the biometrics of doing the job, but doing it ‘without’ sweat.

As said – just curious.

Too high more of a prob than too low.
I find saw stools at 24" get used a lot.
My bench is 33" which seems just about right most of the time. I'm 5'11".
Had some IKEA kitchen stuff - I assumed it'd be the ideal height but is 36" which I find inconvenient, and my wife more so. I would have chosen 36" for the stove, 33" for worktops, 30" for kitchen table, 28" dining table.
Band saw table is 40" which seems ideal - arms out at right angles and hands on say 2" workpiece.

 

[RobCee]

If you want to get scientific, you can always go for this sort of thing: Sizing Workbenches

 

[tomatwark]

I am 6'3" and find that 34" is ideal for sawing and planing etc, but too low for marking out, gluing up doors, working on units etc.

I have 34" bench against the wall for sawing etc, but I also have a centre bench with a vice on heavy duty castors which is 43" and is ideal for assembly tasks.

I have in the past when short of space used blocks and kept a trolley jack to lift and lower the bench onto them when needed.

 

[Mark A]

My main bench is 35", but I made my other bench 40" for the days I wear my heels.

 

[Mr T]

I am surprised that Paul Sellars specifies a particular height, surely it depends on taste and stature. I usually base it on the height from floor to the crease of your wist when standing upright plus 25mm. That seems to work OK.

Chris

 

[Phil Pascoe]

... surely it depends on taste and stature, and the type of work you mostly do.

 

[DBT85]

I am surprised that Paul Sellars specifies a particular height, surely it depends on taste and stature. I usually base it on the height from floor to the crease of your wist when standing upright plus 25mm. That seems to work OK.

Chris

He specs it at 38" as that's what he's always used and he's (I think ) 5'11". He does say that if you think it might be too low then cut your legs longer and that its easy to correct a bench that's too high.

I think he also mentioned that it all depends on you and the work you do, that back in the day doing huge lumps of wood with wooden planes would mean you'd want it lower etc.

 

[Tasky]

I am surprised that Paul Sellars specifies a particular height, surely it depends on taste and stature. I usually base it on the height from floor to the crease of your wist when standing upright plus 25mm. That seems to work OK.
Chris

He merely gives the height of his own bench, states that it what suits him and seems to be the rough average of what his subscribers said they use in a couple of surveys... but does go on to explain that this height will vary depending on your own height and the work you do.

Richard Maguire took the 38" to be a fixed value and had a bit of a rant about it, going on about how you need a ridiculously low bench in order to bear your whole bodyweight down on the plane, etc etc... and then retracted the rant after reading Sellers' articles properly! :lol:

Sellers in turn responded by reiterating the variable nature of this bench height, stating again that the 38" is merely what he and a fair few of his followers use based on the small-ish joinery work they do, and went on to point out variables like the difference in heights between metal Bailey and wooden planes.
He has also shown off the benches used by one of his taller staff members, which would be uncomfortably high for most people.

I was watching another woodworker's videos recently and she also pointed out that her low bench is great for planing (another bodyweight user), but awkward for marking up or making more than a handful of sawcuts.