Design opinions wanted

[tag]

The next project I’m going to make is the Arts & Crafts glass front cabinet FWW plan SU52 out of QSWO. I don’t want a glass front so my plan is to book match a figured QSWO panel instead. The door is 24x14 with the rails/stiles 2.5” wide. I’m torn with leaving the them 2.5”
or making them wider similar looking to Woodsmiths Gentlemen’s dresser that I plan on making after the cabinet. 

I don’t want to make the cabinet a mini-me of the gentleman’s dresser but they will be similar. 

So:

Do you think rails/stiles 2.5” wide on a 24x14 door is good (pleasing to the eye) or will widening them be better? If so how wide?
Will a highly figured QSWO book matched panel be too much or would a lesser figured panel be better?

[DaveR1]

I would leave the rails and stiles as they are.

I might consider adding vertical strips on the panel like he did on this wall cabinet and others.

[Philip1231]

You could make a mock-up from scraps to give you an idea of what the options will look like. A single corner with the door panel should give you a good idea.

[Gary G™]

Opinions are like opinions—everybody has one.
Make a mock up and see what you like.
Mock up both since you’re putting them in close proximity.

The site Cooler linked below looks like a real good idea.

[jteneyck]

The bottom rail is much wider than 2.5", and I'd leave it wide so that it harmonizes with the other piece.  2.5" for the other door members looks good to me.  Also, you might consider making the door frame members out of rift sawn stock to better set off the QS panel.  


John

[Cooler]

This site compares doors with various widths of the rails and stiles. 

Looking at the photos may help you decide on which way to go.

https://www.woodworkingnetwork.com/news/...aples-door

[mr_skittle]

I'd stick with the 2.5-inch frame pieces. Oversized rails and stiles seem to really dominate the character of a piece. I would second John's idea of using riftsawn oak for the panel. It's a nice, subtle contrast. In my experience, the ray fleck in the QSWO muddles the book-matched effect you get in typical flatsawn lumber. The ray fleck effect seems to be so thin, a saw kerf and subsequent smoothing is enough to affect the mirror image look that a book match is aiming for.

[jteneyck]

I'd stick with the 2.5-inch frame pieces.  Oversized rails and stiles seem to really dominate the character of a piece. I would second John's idea of using riftsawn oak for the panel. It's a nice, subtle contrast. In my experience, the ray fleck in the QSWO muddles the book-matched effect you get in typical flatsawn lumber. The ray fleck effect seems to be so thin, a saw kerf and subsequent smoothing is enough to affect the mirror image look that a book match is aiming for.

Actually, my suggestion was to use riftsawn stock for the frame of the door and QS for the panel.  And I would not use a bookmatch for a panel that's only about 10" wide; I'd find a single piece of QS stock.  

John

[mr_skittle]

Actually, my suggestion was to use riftsawn stock for the frame of the door and QS for the panel.  And I would not use a bookmatch for a panel that's only about 10" wide; I'd find a single piece of QS stock.  

John

My apologies for misquoting you. 



Good luck on the project and be sure to share some pics.

[tag]

Thanks for all of the opinions. Lots to think about but will probably stick with the 2.5” frame pieces, rift sawn if I have it and I think I might have some stock wide enough to not need to book match.