The new LV combo plane is now available on the last day of free shipping in case you missed it and are interested.
Printable View
The new LV combo plane is now available on the last day of free shipping in case you missed it and are interested.
I ordered one and had it sent UPS Red, so...
6 rod-clamp (2 ea x (2 skates + fence))
2 fence adjust-lock screws (1 ea side)
1 fence adjust screw
2 depth stop adjust screw (1/fence)
2 depth stop lock screw (1/fence)
1 blade depth adjust
1 blade tension
1 wide-blade bias on secondary skate
1 narrow-blade bias on primary skate
The "blade bias" screws keep the blade registered against the lateral registration surface in the primary skate. There are 2 for narrow/wide blades. It's a big hard to explain.
This sounds like the blade tension (lever cap) could be set to allow for blade adjustment in use with the blade bias bolts keeping the blade from slipping laterally. This is a feature that would assist greatly when cutting stopped features.Quote:
The "blade bias" screws keep the blade registered against the lateral registration surface in the primary skate. There are 2 for narrow/wide blades. It's a big hard to explain.
What is the diameter of the rods holding the fence? I am curious if the Stanley cam stops will work on the Veritas Combination Plane.
jtk
What did they say about a video is worth...?
https://youtu.be/0rhNv3O9nw0
This is a different animal from the 45, not just in the # of knobs it has.
Simon
Different sized rods......different spacings. Points on the spurs simply fold over, even in Pine.
I think "simply fold over" is a bit of an exaggeration especially from someone who doesn't own one. I merely got a burr on the tip when it was brand new and very thin/pointy at the tip which never happened again once I filed it off and got to the slightly meatier part of the tip.
yeah, that is what I basically did and haven't had any issue since.
Jim, I would eventually like to post a 'review' but at the rate of shop time I've been getting recently, it'll be too late. I will say though that the number of brass knobs, though daunting to look at, are very intuitive to use - anyone with any experience using a fenced plane of any sort would be able to figure out how to use the plane within a couple minutes.
Spurs would need to be reground to a better profile...and not like a Stanley slitting cutter's profile
The narrower Stanley cutters are to narrow to work with the cutter holder bolt.....won't reach.
NOS Stanley cutters will be almost too long, depth adjuster is almost out of threads on "normal" Stanley cutters. NOS ones are about an 1/8" longer than the normal Stanley cutters.
Veritas irons will fit the Stanley 45, but they are so short, you are near the end of a 45's depth adjuster, when the cutters are new....sharpen them a few times....you MIGHT be able to push them along from above the notch....
The above came from a 6 part review, done with both the veritas and the Stanley planes, side by side. I could list the site where to find it....PM me instead.
It's probably worth noting that many other planes with nickers come with similarly sharp profiles to the LV combo. That includes the LN rabbet and skew block planes and at least some Stanleys as you say. I think the assumption is that anybody who buys a plane like this will grind/hone "to taste'. That being the case it makes sense to start with a sharp point, as it's much easier to round a pointy profile than to sharpen a blunt one.
The only previous examples that I've seen that don't have pointy nickers are the LV rabbets (bench and otherwise) and the LV and LN skew block planes. Those use wheel cutters, though I suspect there wasn't room to incorporate that mechanism in a skate.
The only Stanley cutters that don't work are the #10 (1/8" plough) and the #32 (narrowest fluting cutter). There are two issues: Those cutters have a hole instead of a slot for depth adjust, so the LV depth adjust mechanism is incompatible. Also and as you say, the tensioning bolt falls "outside" of them.
What do you mean by "NOS" here"? The as-factory-ground cutters for my 55 have about 1/8" of clearance with the LV depth adjust mechanism. Did Stanley subsequently change the design?
Also if this is a real issue then I suspect there's a workaround. The Veritas adjuster is made out of 2 parts - the brass knob and the steel nut with the adjustment flange. It looks to me as though you could remove the brass knob and reverse the nut (so that the threaded part is mostly below the flange instead of mostly above) and thereby add about 1/2" of adjustment range. The ergonomics wouldn't be great (no knob = not much leverage).
You could also turn your own nut with a longer threaded section below the flange, obviously (or LV could offer one... hint hint).
I don't have any non-fitting irons so I'm not inclined to try to separate my nut and knob. They appear to be Loctite-ed together.
Errm, how exactly are you sharpening? My LV irons extend 3/8" beyond the bottom of the main skate in my Stanley with the adjuster bottomed out. I don't know about you, but I don't remove 1/8" of steel per sharpening.
Sounds like somebody had a serious axe to grind and didn't let facts get in the way.
With all of that said, the LV is a different design with different tradeoffs. Some will like it, others may not. Personally I like having blade bias screws and a blade tension mechanism that doesn't bind all the time. The Stanley "cone" tensioner design allows their planes to support very narrow irons, but it brings problems of its own...
I did not do the review....two others got together to compare both a Stanley 45 and the Veritas Combo plane. They reshaped the profile on the nickers, AFTER they had found then bent over at the tips..by a pine board.
Afraid the cutters on MY Stanley 45 are about.....90 years old, and have been sharpened quite a few times BEFORE I even got them.
The two "testers" compared the way the cutters fit into BOTH planes. They almost ran out of threads on the veritas plane, trying to install a simple cutter from a #45's set. Again, they used a type 17 and a type 6 #45 and their cutters. YMMV
The bolt referred to? Is the ones that thread into the sides of the cutter, either on the sliding stock or the main stock. Might want to slip back and check on that as well....or did you miss that little detail...since it is what Veritas calls that bolt.
Not sure where YOU bought those two cutters at....you might want a refund for getting the wrong ones. IF you want, I can go and look at the ones I have ( I just used the #11 this week..) There IS one cutter by Stanley, that has no notch, as it is shorter than the normal cutters. The pin will push on the end of that. And, I just went and checked the 1/8" cutter and the #11 3/16" cutters. The 1/8" cutter was too narrow to make a notch for the pin.
Even nhplaneparts has no idea WHY there are cutters with holes, instead of slots....
In that case that would improve the fit since the Stanley irons are LONGER. My set is 107 years old. The straight irons had been ground to h*ll, and I had to reverse the bevel on one of them, which knocked another 3/16" or so off. Those cutters all fit fine. The concern with Stanley irons is that when in factory-ground condition they are towards the UPPER length limit of the LV plane. I purposely checked a bunch of irons that had not been previously sharpened (which is basically the definition of "NOS"), and they all fit.
"Almost" only counts in horse shoes and hand grenades. They fit, period. I'm sure LV were fully aware of the length of factory-ground Stanley irons when they designed the adjuster the way they did, and that's why the as-factory-ground Stanley iron are right up at but not over the limit.
The Stanley doesn't even *have* that bolt. So the complaint here is that an added useful feature doesn't work with a small number of 3rd party blades? Wow, that's some drawback.
The drawback that I cited (tensioner screw too far from registration face with the #10 and #32) is actually far more serious btw.
EDIT: It may be that Stanley widened the shafts of those two irons later in the production run. Can you please measure the width your #10 (1/8" plough iron) just below the slot/hole/whatever? Also is yours constant width from edge to slot/hole, or does it get wider like the narrower Veritas irons.
I said #10 and #32, not #11. The #11 has a slot and fits fine in the LV plane. If you have a basic 45 cutter set then you don't even have the #32, but I was being thorough for the benefit of others. Please read carefully before you reply.
The TWO (not one) Stanley cutters in question are so narrow (both have 1/8" shanks) that there wouldn't be enough metal on one side of a slot to resist retraction force when the blade is under tension. Using a hole instead of a slot provides support on both sides and fixes the issue. I suspect that's also why the 45 and 55 use a pin instead of a tab for adjustment in the first place.
EDIT: Added question about later-production 10 and 32 irons. See "EDIT" above.
My recollection is this was how the type 5 and maybe type 6 cutters were made. A few of my #45 cutters are this way. It is easier to install a cutter into the plane with a notch than it is a drilled hole. Stanley designers were likely quick to figure out this little upgrade.Quote:
Even nhplaneparts has no idea WHY there are cutters with holes, instead of slots....
After reading the review on LumberJocks, it seems there are a few features on the Veritas to improve on a 130 year old design.
One significant point made in the review seems to be aimed at those who do not want the experience of finding and rehabilitating an old tool. The Veritas is the one combination plane to offer peace of mind into their buying experience. Many folks are like me and love to tinker with things. Many more like to open a box without worries and put their new purchase to work.
The #45 is for those who enjoy the smell of rust and like to tinker. The VCP is for those who do not even want to be bothered with sharpening a blade when the plane arrives.
The Veritas Combination Plane is simply a modern day version of a good old tool. It benefits from modern manufacturing technology and improvements.
jtk
The author, who does not own the Veritas, ended up preferring it to the Stanley and stating that he would like one. His comments were almost completely in favour of the Veritas ... and I think he was surprised, since he went in skeptical.
I would, however, hardly view his review as full - he did not use most if the blades. I, on the other hand, have not only used all, but have extensive time on both planes. I am in a position to make first hand comments.
Regards from Perth
Derek
Hey Derek, please feel free to correct anything I got wrong above. I've only had the LV plane for a few days and may have missed something.
Also it appears that the #10 and #32 irons changed in design from a hole to a slot somewhere between 1910 (my examples) and the 1920s (Steven's). The newer irons are may be more compatible with the LV plane.
An early version of a similar feature does appear on the Stanley #55. There is a screw mounted on the main body on the right hand side near the handle. It screws into the adjustable skate to provide stability for a blade when working on a face that is at an angle, other than 90º, to the fences. The fences remain fixed and the blade is adjusted deeper in the work on successive strokes. The screw keeps the blade from moving laterally with the blade locking mechanism slightly loose. This screw is often missing. If my recollection is correct it is a 10-28 thread and has a head like the other three locking screws on the plane. (depth stop lock and the rod keeper screws on the main body)Quote:
The Stanley doesn't even *have* that bolt. So the complaint here is that an added useful feature doesn't work with a small number of 3rd party blades? Wow, that's some drawback.
This feature of the #55 hit me like a flash during my experimentation with stopped cuts using the #45.
jtk
The slots on Stanley irons are just under 1/8" deep, which would leave the #10 (1/8 plough) and #16 with very little metal to support the top of the slot. Do you happen to know how they addressed that in later variants? Did they reverse-taper the shafts of later iterations of those irons to make them wider at the slot?
I would have to go out and look at my sets of blades. I do know the early way was a hole. My recollection is one or more of my wider irons also have holes in them instead of slots.
I was about to look for a type study on the #45. Not sure as to where my book on the subject may have gotten off.
jtk
I think this came along when the fence lock bolt was moved to lock one of the rods instead of the screw or shortly after that. Maybe around the same time as the switch from long spurs to the clover leaf spurs.
Attachment 367728
The screw storage spot is right behind the slitter clamp.
jtk
I am merely stating THEIR results. I am more than happy to be using my combo plane.....even if it is a "young" 92 years old.
Stepping away from the debate for a sec. I do have a few quibbles with the Veritas Combination plane. On balance it's an excellent tool, but no design is ever perfect (certainly not any that I had a hand in) and this one is no exception.
- As noted in my reply to Steven's post, the clamp screw is centered about 3/16" from the right-side blade registration surface, which means that it has marginal engagement with blades that have 1/8" shanks. That includes my samples of the #10 and #32. The Stanley "cone clamp" is better in this respect as it provides engagement all the way across, though it has binding issues that the LV doesn't. On balance I think that both designs make reasonable tradeoffs, and which to choose is a subjective preference.
- My sample of the 55 has a 50 deg bed angle, and I find that it's slightly better than the LV in terms of tearout. If I were designing a combo from scratch I think I'd go with a slightly higher-angle bed, though obviously cutter geometry (rounds being round, etc) limits how far you can take that. I don't know if all 55s are 50 deg or if it's something Stanley varied within the production run, but it's certainly beneficial in some circumstances.
- As others have noted it would be nice if the shafts were the same diameter as the 45 or 55 so that we could use accessories like the cam stops (note that the cam stop is single-shaft, so we wouldn't need the spacing to be the same). The lighter/thinner rods are beneficial in themselves, though, so this is again a tradeoff.
One the plus side it's beautifully machined, tightly toleranced, and basically ready to use as delivered, unlike older planes. The skates and fence all lock down in parallel with minimal effort. As am example, the 55's fences tend to get "cocked" if you're not careful because the tension screws push them in opposite directions on each of the two shafts, but the Veritas has no such vices.
You're the one posting apparently cherry-picked parts (per Derek) of that review as fact on *this* forum. You also didn't provide sufficient information to find the review in question, for example the author's name. That makes you more than just a "messenger" as far as this discussion goes.
Pointing out that somebody repeated something misleading as fact without verifying it is not the same thing as calling them a liar. People are wrong for non-malicious reasons all the time.
Veritas Salesperson: Yes, I have indeed read that review...several times....now, have your employers FIX the nickers....
The reason they did have the cutters, is a LACK of shipping of those cutters....IF they HAD been shipped ( like a normal supplier would) they would have reviewed them all. They had all afternoon to try both planes....couldn't someone at least ship what was ordered?
Whether I have or have NOT "handled" the newest and LATEst toy, is NOT a part of THEIR review. I suggest you take up your sales pitch with them.
Reviewer did like SOME of the features.....and is trying to add them to one of his 17 stanley 45s.....
Slightly off topic but I'm selling a Record 045 multi plane on behalf of someone else. I'm taking the opportunity to try it out before moving it on. The first set up I used was the sash profile cutter. I could set it and stick a sash profile. However it was a fiddle and the process made me realise that it would be much easier to use a moulding plane and sash fillister. I would go as far as to say I'd rather buy a shaper to stick larger mouldings than work with a multi plane. I look forward to trying the other cutters, they are very similar to the Veritas offering, and see how they work out. At this moment my opinion is multi planes aren't much fun. Not sure I'll ever use the Veritas, I'm sure it's as good as a multi plane could be, but maybe you can't polish a turd. Steampunk boat anchor perhaps? Look forward to people who have purchased the Veritas sharing their experiences.
Your post reminds me of someone who tried riding a bicycle and gave up after their first fall.
My first attempts at using a multi-bladed plow plane and later a Stanley #45 were also somewhat frustrating at times. There are many little nuances to, as you say, "fiddle" before it all falls into place.
The curve of learning taught me a lot about using other planes as well. Now when different moldings are seen in public, private homes, on TV or in movies my mind sometimes wanders off into how it could be made with the tools in my shop. With just a few different planes and/or blades it is possible to make a wide selection of molding without the expense, the space needed or the noise of a shaper.
jtk
Anyone else read those Blogs? You might even find one of mine, about the Cherry project on the same page.....
I read the blog and thought he made valid observations.
I finally read the 6-part blog/review about the LV combo on the "jock site", but that can't possibly be the one you described earlier in the thread. The conclusions are completely different, other than the part about nickers failing in pine. Which one were you describing?
Is it against the posting rules that you can't give the blog link here? Why are people so cryptic about this review? Don't know what 6-part blog you people are referring to.
I always look at magazine reviews on any tools with caution as they tend to go along with whatever the tool manufacturers pitch (any tool makers that they do business with). Impartiality only exists to a certain extent no matter who the reviewer is, and that is human nature. I prefer Steven's Devil's advocate approach when it comes to new tools as we can always learn a thing or two from a perspective taken from a different angle.
It is a joke when someone posts a review based on one single session of use of a tool, positive or negative. This is not to say the reviewer is a joke, but that anyone who thinks the review means anything is joking themselves. If we keep our minds open, we can come to a better judgment regardless of what the reviewers or the tool makers tell us.
My position remains unchanged: I prefer a new, improved Combo Plane over any Stanley's, but I won't order anything till I get a chance to try it out. The Woodworking Shows will have its new show schedule out soon, according to their notice. I will attend the one that Veritas brings its new plane along. That will be how I decide to buy or wait till Lie-Nielsen releases its.
Simon
I get the feeling, that there WILL be a review coming to this site...very soon. Not allowed to say who will be posting it ( not me, need the money for rent, LOL) Merely have to wait until he gets his review finished.
"Tom, Bert, and William" ....A Scientist with a closed mind is handicapped towards failure...
I have been more than happy with my #45 over the past year or two of use. Before that, it was plough planes with bodies made of Beech, back in the 1860s....contrary to popular rumours , I was NOT around when they made that one.....nor did Abe Lincoln teach me how to drive.....
There are Terms Of Service prohibitiing the posting of links to other woodworking forums.Quote:
Is it against the posting rules that you can't give the blog link here?
My understanding is it may be okay mentioning the review in question is on the LumberJocks (dot com) forum and is in the blog section written by a person going by MOS or Mosquito.
If the above is a violation of the TOS, would a moderator please indicate as such, thank you.
jtk
Thanks Jim. Will do a peek there and read for myself what all the fuss is about, even though I am no big fan of reviews per se.
As for the posting limitations, I learned from a fellow who has written articles for (non-woodworking) magazine that he once included a picture showing the magazine he was writing for as well as the covers of a couple other magazines (in the background), the editor asked him to retake the shot. He wasn't happy about the request but went along. He decided that that was the last time he wrote for that publication. He has done something similar a few times with other magazines before but no other editors advised him to stop. Different house rules at different places.
Simon
Jim, your response reminds me of a man that thinks listening to a one man band is better than listening to a good group or an orchestra :D. I will admit my post had a hint of provocation, thanks for furthering the discussion. Yes, I think a multi plane can be used, it could also be considered useful. If I were to advise a purchaser about an effective plough, rebate and moulding set up it would be a buy a plough, a rebate plane and moulding planes as required. No need to hurry on the moulding planes, it's not likely someone would need a huge amount of moulders.
Budget approach, #78 for rebate work, #44 ploughing, rehab a moulding plane as and when needed. Of course there are names that could be dropped that make excellent products, similar to those options I've described. You could also use a multi plane, they can be used.