Too many planes?

[James Baker SD]

At what point do planes that are only slightly different simply become redundant? Can you really use a #7 jointer and a LV BU jointer? How about a #3 and #4 smoothers--any real difference to make both useable? Are infill smoother versus BU smoother versus bedrock smoother just a matter of preference? Thanks.

James

[Brian Kent]

In the world of smoothers, I really like having several different kinds. Even though they supposedly do the same thing, sometimes one works when the others just wouldn't behave.

[paul cottingham]

Too many planes? Is this a trick question? Did my wife put you up to it?

[harry strasil]

Yup, you only need the ones you do your work with, after that its collecting and removing them from the working population of planes. I have 2 sets , Woodies for my mid 1800's demo tools and transitionals for my everyday working tools, the only iron bodies I have are specialty planes, and a couple of my grandfathers/fathers shop planes.
I collected to use, not to show off, all my planes are users, some would say a few were collectable tho.

[Sean Hughto]

I agree with Brian, that it's funny how slight nuances make similar planes behave differently when facing the same challenging piece of wood. It happens to me regularly that one plane tears our or otherwise lets me down and a similar plane (or at least one designed for the same purpose (e.g., smoothing) will step up and get 'er done.

Also, I like the luxury with duplicates to have them set up differently - like two 7's one rank and one fine. There are lots of examples. I have planes that are redundant, but none I can think of that I never use.

[Jacob Mac]

One really nice aspect about the LV BU planes is that it allows you to interchange the blades between the three planes. Thus you can have a 50, 38 and 25 degree blade and mix and match as the work requires. That gives you a lot of versatility in three planes.I know it saved me when I screwed up the grain direction on my bench top. the 50 degree blade on my BU jointer saved me from having to build a router sled or some other means of flattening my bench top.

So I prefer to have as little in my shop as necessary. So if I am not using it, I am selling it. Hence having three old planes up for sale in the classifieds.

[James Baker SD]

Too many planes? Is this a trick question? Did my wife put you up to it?

No trick, just gathering support for when MY wife says, "what? another one?"

James

[Michael Faurot]

No trick, just gathering support for when MY wife says, "what? another one?"

To which you reply, "And how many pairs of shoes do you need?"

[jerry nazard]

To which you reply, "And how many pairs of shoes do you need?"

You might ask yourself: "Self, how many planes do I need to become the Imelda Marcos of woodworking...?" <gr>>>>

[Michael Faurot]

You might ask yourself: "Self, how many planes do I need to become the Imelda Marcos of woodworking...?" <gr>>>>

A few more I think. I'm not quite there.

[jerry nazard]

A few more I think. I'm not quite there.

Neither am I, and I'm really not into shoes.... <gr> How is the infill shoulder plane doing? That was a very interesting thread.

[David Keller NC]

At what point do planes that are only slightly different simply become redundant? Can you really use a #7 jointer and a LV BU jointer? How about a #3 and #4 smoothers--any real difference to make both useable? Are infill smoother versus BU smoother versus bedrock smoother just a matter of preference? Thanks.

James

Ha! Well, I can't answer the implied question "how many is enough?", but I would note that if you're a dedicated hand tool user, particularly if you mostly prep planks for use with handplanes, there's reasons for having a couple of the same size.

For example, to prep rough sawn boards, you need a "roughing plane". Exactly what plane that is depends on you preferences, the scale of the work you do, and in some cases, the species of the wood.

I have an Ohio Tools wooden fore plane of about 20" in length or so that has a wide-open mouth and a 10" radius curve on the iron. It's set-up to take a huge gouge with each pass from a rough sawn plank of mahogany, poplar, pine, or cypress.

Yet, the curve on the iron is too pronounced to work well in maple for the same purpose - the wood's so hard that you'd need to be an olympic weightlifter to take the same thickness and width of shavings as in a softwood board. So I have a Stanley #6 with a Hock blade that has a 14" radius curve on the cutting edge - that allows me to take a thinner, but just as wide, shaving.

Jointers are another example - many of us like to have a jointer specifically set up for "match planing", where two boards are clamped together on their faces and their edges simultaneously planed with a iron that's straight across with no curve. However, thet'd be unsuitable for general work with the jointer on the face of a board, where either the blade has to have a slight curve or the corners need to be rounded to prevent tracking on the board.

One note here is that if you prefer a bevel-down design, you can do the same thing as with a bevel-up plane - you keep a couple of irons, with one sharpened with a 10 degree back-bevel, which gives you an effective planing angle of 55 degrees.

This, by the way, is a good argument for having multiple planes. Because there's a significant increase in force required to push a plane with an effective cutting angle of 55 degrees vs. 45, many of us like to have two planes set up at these different cutting angles so we don't have to stop in mid-stream and replace the blade (and set the lateral alignment and blade projection).

[Jim Koepke]

Well, I guess in all honesty, there are "too many" planes in my shop.
Not by many, but just a few that do not get used. Since they are not taking too much room, they are being saved up for the grandkids or to sell when need be.
There are some duplicates that are set up for different jobs. There are other duplicates that for one reason or another were a deal that just was not passed up.

This may be what "too many" looks like:

Planes 9.1.09.jpg

jim

[jerry nazard]

A blatant example of "planeography".
Have you no shame? ...<gr>....

[Phillip Pattee]

Woah...camellia oil on my pants. How'd that get there?

Jim, you clearly have too many planes. For instance, the 98, 99 pair and the 79 perform the same function. You could send me the 98, and 99 thereby reducing your overload by 2 planes.