Rotable Vices

[Fisherdan]

Hi all,
just a random quick question, who uses rotable vices? i dont use a rotable vice probely because when i ask for a rotating one it ends up not too be rotating...

dan

[spidersplus]

I assume you mean Rotary vices ...

Yes - I use a Rotary vice - a LAW which is a true rotary - i.e. the hook rotates around its shank not the hook bend.

I also tie with a Dynaking Professional - it has a rotary action but is not a true rotary.

There are many true rotary vices out there - but a fair number need to be set correctly to achieve a true rotary action.

Not really sure as to the point of your post ... you thinking about buying a rotary vice?

Kind regards

Phil.
www.spidersplus.co.uk

[Vinnie]

I got a Danvise for Christmas. Its a true rotary.

Cheap and cheerful, takes a bit of getting used to, but I love it now.

You simple use it like a lathe, and you view exactly where the materials are bedding down.

Only downside is there is not much room when tying at the tail end of the fly, but you can get a jaw extension.

Some reviews here:

http://www.jsflyfishing.com/cgi-bin/...a-Danvise.html

[Tango51]

Snowbee Flymate, you can pick them up now for about £30-40, good vice for the money.

[Ronn Lucas, Sr.]

Sorry, neither the LAW nor Danvise are "true rotary". Only the Renzetti are "true rotary" vises. The LAW and Danvise are "in line rotary" vises.

[Signal Crayfish]

Originally Posted by Ronn Lucas, Sr.

Sorry, neither the LAW nor Danvise are "true rotary". Only the Renzetti are "true rotary" vises. The LAW and Danvise are "in line rotary" vises.

Please explain?

My Danvise was sold as a "True Rotary"

Signal C

[spidersplus]

Ronn,

With respect, the LAW can be set to rotate a hook on its shank as opposed to rotating on the hooks' bend (as can the Dynaking Barracuda range of vices as well as a fair number of others)

The LAW therefore can be set as an on axis rotary vice.

At the end of the day, I'm not too fussed as to exact correct technical terms - as long as my LAW can function as I require!

http://www.flyfisherman.com/ftb/hwvise/index10.html

By the way Signal C - your Danvice IS a true rotary!

Kind regards

Phil.
www.spidersplus.co.uk

[Tango51]

Originally Posted by Ronn Lucas, Sr.

Sorry, neither the LAW nor Danvise are "true rotary". Only the Renzetti are "true rotary" vises. The LAW and Danvise are "in line rotary" vises.

Quite true, the vice has to have an adjustment mechnism on the jaw arm to enable ALL hooks (apart from bent shank) to rotate on the shank axis for it to be "True Rotary". Did Renzetti copyright the term?

The LAW does not have this feature and personally I think it's better for it, the more adjusment screws you have, the more fiddling you have to do to set up the vice. For the very few hooks that do step when rotating I can live without it.

For the definition of a true rotary vice......

http://globalflyfisher.com/tiebetter/rotate/truly.php

[grizzle]

Originally Posted by Tango51

Quite true, the vice has to have an adjustment mechnism on the jaw arm to enable ALL hooks (apart from bent shank) to rotate on the shank axis for it to be "True Rotary". Did Renzetti copyright the term?

The LAW does not have this feature and personally I think it's better for it, the more adjusment screws you have, the more fiddling you have to do to set up the vice. For the very few hooks that do step when rotating I can live without it.

For the definition of a true rotary vice......

http://globalflyfisher.com/tiebetter/rotate/truly.php

Agree Tango51 the LAW is a better vice for not having "true rotary" i would much rather wrap my thread/materials around the hook than spin my hook to undertake the procedure.
Much more of an advantage for me are the easily accesable jaws, positive hook lock and the fact its infinately adjustable.

[Hans Weilenmann]

Tango,

Quite true, the vice has to have an adjustment mechnism on the jaw arm to enable ALL hooks (apart from bent shank) to rotate on the shank axis for it to be "True Rotary". Did Renzetti copyright the term?

Renzetti tried, maybe still are, to make the term exclusively theirs, which is likely the background to Ronn's comment?

Cheers,
Hans W