Hand Plane video on you tube

[David Colafranceschi]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EKotbPE22lo


I have had classes from Rob, given a chance he will change the way you work wood, for the better. Check out what an old hand plane can do. One of the nicest gentlemen you will ever meet who oozes with woodworking knowledge. I have taken his classes and have seen first hand the amount of skill he has and his ability to communicate it.

[David DeCristoforo]

I thought I had the best last name here. But my hat's off...

[Peter Quinn]

That is not an instructional video, it is a sales pitch for a $100 plane iron. Add to that the price of a user hand plane, the hours spent fixing it, and the time taken to machine the throat to accept the new iron/chip breaker combo, and I wonder if any value has been achieved. You are working quickly towards the price of a Lie Neilson at that point. I do like his web site though. Looks like a great educator. But this video is a sales tool.

[Kyle Iwamoto]

The vid may be a sales tool but -DAMN- Wow. All the expeletives....

No. I'm not going to buy one. Maybe after I find a Stanley No. 4. Yeah right. I been trying to find one for 20 bux....

[jerry nazard]

Wow! I think that I've seen this thread before....

[Don Morris]

I've got a Bailey #4. How close is that? Inherited it. Use it once in a while. I could always put a piece of paper over the Bailey with "Stanley" on it, squint and play act. Seriously, I'm not a Neander, but do use my handplanes when they're indicated. Sometimes they are really helpful and time savers...and I admit, enjoyable to use. How close is a Bailey to a Stanley?

[Peter Quinn]

Nobody. But someone said something about advertising here on the creek, like maybe not doing it here in the general wood working forum? I'm no master of the TOS, but does this push the limits?

All that said, I'm thinking seriously about that upgrade as a possibility. Still not sure 1 hour is a realistic time frame to rehab an old #4 having done it a few times. But I work cheap. I like that idea of bundling the chip breaker with the iron to over come the problem. Do they have anything for spokeshaves?

[David Nelson1]

Don I dont know, but I have a Bailey #3 that says Stanley also Patent date was 1908 its belonged to my Great grandpa.

[Mitchell Andrus]

...who said anything about the youtube being an instructional video?

Rob Cosman

I do.


OP: "I have had classes from Rob, given a chance he will change the way you work wood, for the better. Check out what an old hand plane can do. One of the nicest gentlemen you will ever meet who oozes with woodworking knowledge. I have taken his classes and have seen first hand the amount of skill he has and his ability to communicate it."


The OP mentions classes, changing the way you work, knowledge, classes (again), skill, communication.... not much about a sales pitch that asks us to go to a website at the end of the Youtube video. BUT, if you don't want to call it an instructional video, it's a sales video.

I'm sure the OP didn't post to entice us to buy hardware, or a set of DVD's for hundreds of dollars, he's passing on a cool thing from someone he trusts... That's OK. And, I don't mind sales pitches being posted on the forum as long as it's marked as such (though a moderator might). I do mind a post that entices me to sit through a Vegamatic demo that doesn't do anything but end with a bold, large font URL at the end where everything has a price tag on it, including the hardware I just saw being demo'd.

Don't get me wrong here, I've got 2 shopping cart sites and 3 other's selling my stuff. But I don't post a "gotta look at this" message where they end up getting a sales pitch in disguise.

Rob, I wish you phenomenal sales, you seem to have a great thing going.
.

[Andrew Pitonyak]

Nobody. But someone said something about advertising here on the creek, like maybe not doing it here in the general wood working forum? I'm no master of the TOS, but does this push the limits?

That depends on how you define "advertising". If Rob posted and said "hey, go here and buy my stuff", that is clearly advertising. I have seen numerous posts similar to "check out this link, what do you think". Sure, the original post was not precisely this, but, kind of close. My wife would point out that I am unassuming and have a strong tendency to assume the best until it is otherwise obvious. So perhaps I am not the best person to judge such things.

I am thinking about picking up one or two of these. I am spoiled by my LN planes. I also have some Stanleys that work well, but, will perform much better with an improved blade and chip breaker. I saw a reference to this video elsewhere on this forum, however. Do not remember where.

[rob cosman]

Same animal.

[Tony Shea]

Stanley/Bailey, basically the same tool and basically the same company. I'm not up on the specifics back a while back on these two names but today Stanley is Bailey. So yes the plane would work fine I assume with the chip breaker blade combo. Rob you took some heat all ready for this one in the neander forum. Hopefully this one turns out a bit better for you. I might look into one of these set ups here soon. I just recently bought a replacement iron from LN for my #7. But when I decide my #5 needs a replacement I will look heavily at the this new setup.

[Brian Kent]

Rob, you say in the video, when you were sent an IBC blade, "I was rather skeptical. I've seen a lot of blades. Never really saw much of a difference."

I am aware of 3 available aftermarket premium blades: Hock, Lie Nielsen, and Lee Valley. I am curious if these are included in the blades where you "Never saw much of a difference"? I thought the consensus of experience is that Hock, Lie Nielsen, and Lee Valley do make a difference in hand plane performance.

Brian

[Brian Kent]

I have been following this and the earlier thread about the new blade and chip breaker set. One thing that is an advantage of the RC set is thickness of blade. The Lee Valley, Hock, and Lie Nielsen blades for old Stanleys are .093" to .095" thick so that the yoke can engage. The new little feature on the RC blade set allows for a .140" thick blade on an old Stanley. New Lie Nielsens have a configuration that allows for a .125", .140", or .175" blade, depending on the size of the plane.

I would expect an improved performance jumping from .093" to .140" on an old Stanley.

I invite the comments of those more experienced in blade replacements. My experiences in blade thickness is in home-made infill planes using blades 5/32 and 1/4" thick (.156" and .250").

Here is a footnote on blade thickness on the Lie Nielsen website.
"Replacement blades for Bench Planes must be thinner to fit the original Stanley, Record or other makers' Bench Planes. If the blade is too thick, the yoke on your plane will not properly engage the slot in the Chipbreaker, The Chipbreaker Screw may not be long enough to install the Chipbreaker at all, but most important the mouth opening may not be large enough to allow the blade, or a shaving, to pass.
Therefore, Bench Plane blades ordered from the list above, identified by width, will be .095" thick, which will work fine on most Bench Planes. Blades of the same width, ordered as replacement blades for our own planes, identified by the tool number (e.g., BL-4) will be thicker (.125" for the 4 and 5, .140" for the 4-1/2 and .175" for the No. 8.)"


So if I am reading all of this correctly, I congratulate Rob Cosman on finding a way to get a .140" thick blade in an old Stanley! (and I still want you to to defend the statement quoted in my last post).

[rob cosman]

Hi Brian, sorry I have been away teaching workshops and just saw your post. The blades mentioned are the premium ones, any of them would make a huge difference over the original Stanley equipment. I did not see a difference amoung those you mentioned including Clifton. The IBC is cryo treated A-2, sides are parallel, edge is square and a very precise primary bevel reduces the honing time to less than a minute using the technique I teach in the included dvd. The single biggest difference in the IBC offering is the level of preparation. The back is flat, the breaker fits perfectly and it is sharp where it meets the blade. Other nice feature is the O-1 steel the breaker is made of. Much harder than the others, holds it's edge and shape. Proof is in the pudding. I am working on a new youtube clip using this set up in an old stanley to tackle figured hardwoods. Good luck.
cheers
Rob