Aftermarket plane blades

[Josh Rudolph]

All,

I recently bought an extra balde for my #4 to have for smoothing some curly maple for my upcoming project. I am going to try a 10* back bevel on it. I also bought a #3 blade and chipbreaker. Both of these blades were A2 Hock blades and a Hock Chipbreaker.

Out of the package, the back of the blades appeared polished. However I went ahead and hit them up with a 4000 and then 8000 stone. As I started on the 4000 stone, I noticed the polishing pattern was not even, indicative to a non-flat back. It was like this on both blades. So I went through my entire sharpening regime to get them setup as I expect them.

I really like Hock blades, but I hate how long they take to get setup. My question is, how could the blades have come to me appearing to have a nice uniformed polished flat back, and in reality they were not. Is it possible they are buffing the backs on a buffer? Or am I just being to anal-retentive about the backs? My goal with sharpening is to keep everything as consistent and repeatable as possible. If everything has been through the same process, quick touchups and re-honing works out to be very fast.

Just because it will be asked, I use Norton waterstones (1,000, 4,000, and 8,000) and flatten the stones before and during each use. I am confident I am working with a solid sharpening setup.

I have reached the point that I will likely be ordering the LV setup next time as I don't like spending that much time setting the Hock's up.

I think I saw on here a while back where someone built a back flattening jig, essentially a block of wood with magnets that allowed the user to put a lot of pressure (significantly more than you could get with just fingers)on the blade as the back was being polished. Is this a good approach or amintroducing problems by applying that much pressure?

Any ideas about the Hock backs or suggestions for me with getting them setup?

Thanks,
Josh

[David Weaver]

I am the person who mentioned the jig. It's just a 2x4 with two bolts in it to pull the iron tight against the block.

That's how hocks are.

LV's are absolutely dead flat, the only ones I've seen that really are flat to your flattest stone all the way to the corners of the iron, etc, on the first swipe.

IBCs are closer than hocks by a pretty good bit, unless they've changed (been probably almost two years since I set one up)

LNs are set up differently than IBCs and about as flat (whatever they do is not the same as LV does flattening, at least it wasn't last year). Last one I got took 5 minutes to set up, maybe they have gotten better at it (presuming that the scratches parallel to the edge are put on by someone by hand. I had an earlier one where those scratches weren't that coplaner with the back of the iron and made for more work).

It takes about 5-10 minutes to do a brand new hock iron with the flattener - all the way up to a shapton 15k.

If the stones are on a good surface, the pressure isn't a problem, but you have to be mindful about the flatness because the extra pressure runs the stones out of flat fast.

[Jim Belair]

If I were you I'd feed my disappointment back to Hock also. With the viable alternatives available they should be taking such feedback to heart.

Just my opinion
Jim B

[Zach England]

They don't get mentioned on forums as much, but also try the Ray Iles irons.

[tico vogt]

I know what you mean about the Hock blades not being flat. I've purchased three and all were in need of some significant work. It is a one time operation, but surprising that it's necessary. Two recent L-N blades weren't dead flat either, and one was cupped the wrong way, really making it difficult. I would have sent it back but needed to use it immediately. Deneb at L-N laughed when I told him about it and said I should have returned it.

The moral I suppose is that, even with these high priced blades, don't count on flatness and maybe be prepared to send them back.
As far as the process of flattening the back, I favor abrasive paper on granite. Do I want to have to spend time flattening stones as well as the iron? No!

[jamie shard]

I tend to go with LV for plane blades, always flat and they hold up great. It seems like LV made a pretty strategic investment in the machinery that gets these things so flat... It has really changed expectations for plane blades.

I bought a Hock blade for a spokeshave and it needed work, but not a problem on something that small.

[Ed Looney]

I believe Lee-Valley goes a step beyond grinding and lapps their plane blades. After putting the final touch-up on the new Lee-Valley plane and extra blades my wife got me last Christmas I think I will stay with the Lee-Valley blades. They take way less effort to get fettled in and you can get either O1 or A2, your choice.

Lapping information available at link below.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lapping

Ed

[Jim Koepke]

All,

I recently bought an extra balde for my #4 to have for smoothing some curly maple for my upcoming project. I am going to try a 10* back bevel on it. I also bought a #3 blade and chipbreaker. Both of these blades were A2 Hock blades and a Hock Chipbreaker.

Out of the package, the back of the blades appeared polished. However I went ahead and hit them up with a 4000 and then 8000 stone. As I started on the 4000 stone, I noticed the polishing pattern was not even, indicative to a non-flat back. It was like this on both blades. So I went through my entire sharpening regime to get them setup as I expect them.

I really like Hock blades, but I hate how long they take to get setup. My question is, how could the blades have come to me appearing to have a nice uniformed polished flat back, and in reality they were not. Is it possible they are buffing the backs on a buffer? Or am I just being to anal-retentive about the backs? My goal with sharpening is to keep everything as consistent and repeatable as possible. If everything has been through the same process, quick touchups and re-honing works out to be very fast.

Just because it will be asked, I use Norton waterstones (1,000, 4,000, and 8,000) and flatten the stones before and during each use. I am confident I am working with a solid sharpening setup.

I have reached the point that I will likely be ordering the LV setup next time as I don't like spending that much time setting the Hock's up.

I think I saw on here a while back where someone built a back flattening jig, essentially a block of wood with magnets that allowed the user to put a lot of pressure (significantly more than you could get with just fingers)on the blade as the back was being polished. Is this a good approach or amintroducing problems by applying that much pressure?

Any ideas about the Hock backs or suggestions for me with getting them setup?

Thanks,
Josh

I have a few Hock blades and have never noticed a polished back. They usually have scratches that look like the last honing was done with a 1000 grit or less. I give mine a bit of work and then use them. They seem to work fine. Over time I have worked the backs each time they get to the stones.

My guess is that each maker has their own process in making blades.

If my memory is correct, Hock was one of the first blades available on the secondary market. My recollection is he was making knives and was asked if he could make blades for the students at the College of the Redwoods who were making planes in the Krenov classes.

It would not surprise me if Hock originally did not worry as much about the backs because the students were assigned to take care of this in class.

Back to the OP. If there is going to be a 10° back bevel it is as easy as using the ruler trick to take care of the backside.

For my own situation, a long time ago with old Stanley blades it was noticed that they were difficult to get polished all the way out to the edges. When these were used in a plane, they didn't cut all the way to the edge. Surprise, surprise, surprise! They also didn't dig in at the corners and leave tracks. That led me to having a cambered blade without having to camber the blade.

http://www.sawmillcreek.org/showthre...t-Finally-Came

jtk

[Josh Rudolph]

I have a few Hock blades and have never noticed a polished back. They usually have scratches that look like the last honing was done with a 1000 grit or less. I give mine a bit of work and then use them. They seem to work fine. Over time I have worked the backs each time they get to the stones.

jtk

Jim,

My previous Hock acquisitions were not what I would call polished. They were the same as you describe. These blades that I received last night (ordered from Craftsman's Studio on Monday) definitely had a refined polish on them. Not quite mirror like that I get from my 8000 stone, but polished like I get from my 4000 stone. The polish was even across the back up to about .75" from the cutting edge, then transitioned back into the typical scratch pattern found on their blades.

I really wish I would have taken a pic, but went ahead and started sharpening.

I do really enjoy my Hock blades and thoroughly enjoyed reading the Perfect Edge book as I learned a tremendous amount of information. But with the workout I get every time I get a Hock blade, it has me wanting to venture and try the LV next time.

I will be getting around to rehabbing either my MF #18 or Stanley #6 next, just depends on which one I think will clean up and be the best user.

Josh

[Jim Koepke]

Jim,

My previous Hock acquisitions were not what I would call polished. They were the same as you describe. These blades that I received last night (ordered from Craftsman's Studio on Monday) definitely had a refined polish on them. Not quite mirror like that I get from my 8000 stone, but polished like I get from my 4000 stone. The polish was even across the back up to about .75" from the cutting edge, then transitioned back into the typical scratch pattern found on their blades.

Josh

Interesting… Many times I do not rely on my visual senses. Instead, I will put a blade in a plane and see how it does. If it makes good shavings, then I do not worry about how it looks. Often an old blade will have a pit along the edge and will make a shaving with a separation in its width. Eventually after a few times of being sharpened the edge moves past the pitted area. I have had scratches at the edge of a blade that had no effect on the results produced. I tend to not worry about those. Eventually with repeated sharpening they go away.

A lot of folks have suggested that once the back is flat, it will never again need work. I do not find this to always be the case.

Because the back side of the blade comes in contact with the surface being worked, it is always rubbed on the stones when a blade is being honed.

jtk

[David Weaver]

I'm not sure what all of the manufacturers do, but here's what I would guess:

* LV uses a rotary lapper (I think i've seen pictures of it from their palm plan). You are not going to do anything flatter than a rotary lapper by hand, so for practical purposes, it's "perfectly flat".

* hocks appear to be fresh off the surface grinder. Sometimes they're super quick, sometimes they take a little more work. The finish looks like a surface grinder finish

* IBCs are surface ground and then look to be polished or lapped and polished. I'm not sure how they arrive at the final project.

* LNs are surface ground and then it appears they are either put in a jig or hand lapped with an abrasive (paper?). I've seen videos of people in the factory hand lapping on granite surface plates, and that's what I'd guess for what they're doing

What LV does is tremendously expensive (machine wise, and the irons probably have to spend quite some time on a rotary lapper before they are as fine as they are finished). What IBC does is probably expensive, too.

[Joel Goodman]

I have one Hock iron and I also found it wasn't flat. It was a lot more work than LV, LN or a carbon steel Ray Isles, which by design is slightly hollow on the back (think japanese chisel). I'm sure the Hock irons are great but it's a PITA to prep them. YMMV!

[Mike Henderson]

While this isn't a story about new plane blades, I've never bought a used Stanley plane (except from another woodworker) which had a blade with a flat back. Many were WAY out of flat.

Mike

[Tom McMahon]

I have never understood all this concern with a perfectly flat back on a plane iron. A slight back bevel is actually an advantage, it helps reduce tear out and makes sharpening take second instead of hours. I use the ruler trick on all plane irons even new LV. If this was so important why do you almost never find an old plane with a flat iron. All the old cabinet makers couldn't be wrong.

[Josh Rudolph]

I have never understood all this concern with a perfectly flat back on a plane iron. A slight back bevel is actually an advantage, it helps reduce tear out and makes sharpening take second instead of hours. I use the ruler trick on all plane irons even new LV. If this was so important why do you almost never find an old plane with a flat iron. All the old cabinet makers couldn't be wrong.

Tom,

You make a good point. It makes perfect sense as to why we need flat backs on a chisel, but why do we need them on a plane blade if you are putting a back bevel or "ruler tricking" it? I guess I have never thought about it it's relevance since I started back beveling. It could be the same OCD that makes guys worry about their tablesaw being .002" out of flat.

Is there any real reason to flatten the back's like we do if we use a back bevel/ruler trick?