FWW's "Every Handplane Needs a Tuneup" - a video response

[Adam Cruea]

I would be more concerned about using a screwdriver with the appropriate blade size and profile than about it's length. A foot long screwdriver will deliver no more torque than a 3" long screwdriver!

I will kindly disagree. A foot long screwdriver can have a 4" handle I can grasp with my ham hock and utilize. A 3" screwdriver does not. Hence, I can tighten better with a foot long screwdriver.

[paul cottingham]

Well said, Mr. George.

It makes me wonder, though. . .if "perfect" and "flat" are so important, how did the Greeks, Romans, Egyptians, and other ancient cultures make such beautiful and elaborate work?

Most of their extant work is made of stone, but I still agree with your original point, I doubt their tools were as flat or sharp as we seem to think is essential.

[Adam Cruea]

Most of their extant work is made of stone, but I still agree with your original point, I doubt their tools were as flat or sharp as we seem to think is essential.

I was also thinking "perfect" as in "suitable for the job".

As far as I know, none of the ancient cultures had the hard tool steels we do today. I don't even think really good steel started showing up until Japanese Feudal times, which was used in swords (but I could well be wrong), so stones and soft metals/alloys were the tools to use on any medium.

[george wilson]

Adam,I don't understand your point. Where did I say that "perfect" or "flat" were essential to tools(or plane soles?)

It does not take a flat tool of any kind to make a flat stone. They were made by chipping away at stone surfaces with chisels,and rubbing with harder stones. The most amazing precision stone work is that found at very high altitudes in South America. Such high altitudes that it is hard to just get enough oxygen. It is felt that a man would dedicate his whole life to shaping a single stone. I don't(no one) knows how they really did the work they did on the very hard types of stone they used. The Egyptians made the pyramids from relatively soft limestone. Imagine using soft copper tools to do that,though!!

Then,in Jerusalem,there is a stone that weighs about 400 tons (IIRC) that was shaped and used in the wall of the temple. We don't really know how they moved those,either.

[Adam Cruea]

Adam,I don't understand your point. Where did I say that "perfect" or "flat" were essential to tools(or plane soles?)

It does not take a flat tool of any kind to make a flat stone. They were made by chipping away at stone surfaces with chisels,and rubbing with harder stones. The most amazing precision stone work is that found at very high altitudes in South America. Such high altitudes that it is hard to just get enough oxygen. It is felt that a man would dedicate his whole life to shaping a single stone. I don't(no one) knows how they really did the work they did on the very hard types of stone they used. The Egyptians made the pyramids from relatively soft limestone. Imagine using soft copper tools to do that,though!!

Then,in Jerusalem,there is a stone that weighs about 400 tons (IIRC) that was shaped and used in the wall of the temple. We don't really know how they moved those,either.

You never did. I was referencing those that flip out about things being dead flat in their shops, ie, flattening a brand new plane (or flattening a chisel, etc).

And yes, I've seen specials (Ancient Aliens?) about the stone slabs in South America. Some speculate that they actually melted the rock down and poured it to make the joints (doubt it). Others think it was aliens (maybe?). Personally, I just think people then didn't over think things and kept it simple. ie, for something perfectly vertical, use a weight on the end of rope. For a flat line, simply use a piece of string strung between two points and you'll have a reference for "flat".

[george wilson]

I don't think the stones have anything to do with aliens,but they do exist,and are quite remarkable,aren't they? There are remarkable ancient constructions in many places.

[Dale Cruea]

I have been reading most of this thread with little interest.
I think, "Good grief, If it works use it."
I bought a plane the the last half of the heel of the sole is .005" or more bowed up.
I would not use it because it was not "flat".
I started using it for roughing work.
It is one of the best best planes I have for getting a board flat.

To tune a plane.
Do what you need to do. After you have made a shaving or two.
Old planes and LV or LN, I hone the blade and use them.
I let the shaving, the feel of the plane and the finish on the board tell me if the plane is working to my specs.

Flat, square and parallel are things to strive for in woodworking and should be understood that is will never be reached.
Get it as close as you can with your skill level and move on.

Hope I did not upset anyone. It was just a video. If you don't agree fine. If you do, also fine.
My work and tools are not perfect.
I left perfect when I retired.
My hobby is for me and is fun.

My opinion only. Hope you all have a great day. Make shavings not war.

[Jim Koepke]

I think, "Good grief, If it works use it."

What a concept…

It seems many people likely get themselves into troublesome situations because instead of first trying out a new tool they want to take it apart and make it better. Do these same folks do this when they purchase a, washing machine, TV or a vehicle?

Usually at most for me is the blade is removed and sharpened before any other adjustments are made. Having done this a few times, it isn't a big deal for me to disassemble and reassemble a plane. For some, it is a new world.

Over the years my thoughts on recommending purchasing new versus used has been adjusted by adding a few caveats. If a person has some background working with mechanical things, tuning up a hand plane shouldn't be rocket science. If a person has to go to the hardware store to buy tools to work on a hand plane, then it is likely to be a difficult challenge to tune it up as the first mechanical project of one's life.

jtk

[David Weaver]

"bowed up" or convex is good. "bowed down" the same amount for anything but a rough plane is bad.

Part of the problem is most of the people talking and most of the people being catered to don't have enough experience to know what flaws are neutral or even positive and what flaws are negative, and it's not just a magnitude issue.

Most of the people reconditioning planes in volume don't have a clue, either, because either they've never designed a plane or they've never done any serious woodworking where they forgo sanding and machine planing.

The people who have no clue what they're doing are more willing to spend money than the people who do. That steers what's in print. I thought the magazines were interesting when I was a beginner. I haven't taken one in a long time, though, I think the business model is outdated and doesn't return the money for my dollar. For the same price as a subscription, I'd rather get a couple of used books or one new one, and have an extensive reference without router bit comparisons, chisel bashing tests and finger-joint how to.

[Jim Neeley]

I'm not sure how spending $425.00 make a product immune from deficiencies, in fact I'm certain that this is not the case. Has anyone here spent much more money than this on equipment only to find that manufacturing tolerances have not been held? There are threads all over the place that would indicate yes. Are there burrs running rampant on an LV plane? I don't know. What I do know is a bit about manufacturing and I know that CNC machined items come off the machine with burrs. In many cases burrs are removed manually. Manually, well there's room for error now.

I personally have returned two planes to a high end manufacturer and my friend has returned one to the same manufacturer - why? Because a casting was cracked, sides of a shooting plane were ground out of square in excess of 2 degrees and the bottom of a > $425 plane was anything but flat. (The manufacturer was beyond reproach in their response to our concerns in each instance!) Mistakes happen in production - period. If spending $425 makes you think that you're buying perfection then you certainly can save money on buying machinist quality measuring tools but it doesn't mean that the article holds the stated production tolerances.

We can all read these threads and think that we've "learned" something but really we all need to go back to our shops and put the time in to actually do what we are speaking of. Of course in many cases this means spending money as well as time. An opinion is just that, an opinion, but it really isn't that useful if it is not backed by hard earned knowledge.

I have no doubt that many woodworkers are very happy with their planes, chisels etc. right out of the box. I am sure that they get right down to doing some beautiful woodworking once the package arrives at their door and that's great. I personally have come to the place where out of the box is not the finish line, close but not quite there. To date I feel that my efforts out of the box have been worth the extra time and money spent.

Chris,

I *generally* agree with what I'm reading that you've written. I say it that way because we may well be in close agreement, syntax aside.

I'm a believer in "inspect what you expect", something I endeavor to practice yet sometimes get bit with. By this I agree that we should not ASS-U-ME that a single LV, L-N or other fine tool is "blemish or flaw-free". What I believe though is that they *should* be pretty darned close, but that we should confirm it meets our requirement prior to putting it to a crucial service, if not when first received.

What I haven't seen yet in the dozen or so LV or L-N planes I've purchased is one requiring any serious fettling. If I did, I'd be talking to Rob or Tom about it.

My point is these vendors have the quality in their products that places themselves head-and-shoulders above even some of their like-priced competitors.

In other words, I inspect prior to gathering up the fettling tools. :-):-)

Just my $0.02.. YMMV.

Jim in Alaska

[david charlesworth]

I am astonished no one has mentioned that Pat Megowan appears to be using the Charlesworth sharpening method !!

It is extremely odd that Tommy was working on what apeared to be a Quansheng or perhaps Woodriver plane. However much one wishes to dislike these, the surface grinding of sole and sides has been outstanding, on the ones I have seen. The soles are going to get much, much worse if abraded on 80 grit paper on the average bench surface.

Plane tuning fascinates me as my first Stanley UK planes, circa 1971, did not work at all well as they were so crooked and badly made. Todays high end planes are completely different and do not need messing with.

I have a three part article on plane tuning with the IBC Cosman blade sets, appearing in Furniture & Cabinetmaking issues 200, 201 and 202.

Best wishes,
David Charlesworth

[Matt McCormick]

I am astonished no one has mentioned that Pat Megowan appears to be using the Charlesworth sharpening method !!

Best wishes,
David Charlesworth

Hey give us some time...... We complain about one thing at a time.... You are probably next David .

[david charlesworth]

Excellent !!

David

[eric mah]

My friend and I were discussing this thread. I told him that anyone who is purchasing a LV or LN plane would probably have a good idea of what they purchased and how to use it. He smiled, shook his head and reminded me about the LV and LN planes I had purchased from a trader type who had dabbled in woodworking for a time. Apparently he had adjusted and misadjusted the planes, but said he could never get a good cut with them. I took them to my friends shop to show off my new planes. We threw a piece of poplar in the vice and proceeded try out my new toys. Sure enough neither of us could get a shaving after adjusting the blade out. Took the blade off and noticed the breaker was set a 1/16" beyond the edge of the blade covering the edge. A quick readjustment and the plane worked fine. Sure we sharpened the blade anyway, but what a waste of a plane. Oh yeah, the LN dovetail saws supposedly needed to be resharpened too, but they cut thru oak pretty easily when we tried.

[Jim Koepke]

Oh yeah, the LN dovetail saws supposedly needed to be resharpened too, but they cut thru oak pretty easily when we tried.

Maybe he forgot to remove the tooth cover?

jtk