Is a jointer a must have?

[John A. Callaway]

Good stuff guys. Thanks for the input. Again, I thought this would be the project that really required a jointer. I've been watching eBay and the classifieds here for a Bailey 7 or 8 for a while. I'll pull the trigger when I find it for sure.

I found mine from a small dealer up in the northeast. Always has great users, and good prices. Do a google search for syndas sloot .

[Harold Burrell]

Bobby,

I wondered then same thing about getting a jointer...for a while...until I got one. Now I look for excuses to use it (them). They are just so macho.

Anyway...in my search for a #8, I picked up 3 in a lot at a Martin Donnelly auction. If you are interested in one of them, send me a PM. I'd tune it up for you and get it ready to "rock and roll".

[Paul Saffold]

"A jointer should have been the first plane you bought, not the last."

Personally, I find the jack (#5) the most used and versatile so would recommend it as a first plane.

[Jeff Heath]

One of the reasons we buy tools, and add tools to our working arsenal, is to make projects easier and faster to complete. For me, it's the only reason.

With enough skill, and the knowledge of how to make a good, long straight edge and a pair of winding sticks, you can diligently flatten your bench with a block plane. For that matter, you can do the same with a chisel. the question is, why would you want to?

I've met a few carvers in my lifetime who can do amazing work with a sharpened spoon. They still choose not to.

All the sizes and different shapes of planes have a purpose. Many perform multiple tasks, and some perform one function only. If you're going to be hand working timbers longer than 2 to 3 feet, having a nice long jointer plane will make life much easier, and will get you through some very mundane tasks much quicker.

Add one to your arsenal. You won't regret it.

Just in case someone is keep score, I think a block plane is the first plane I'd buy (make, for me) if I were starting fresh, knowing what I know now. A low angle jack plane wouldn't be far behind........1 & 1A on the purchase(build) list.

Jeff

[David Myers]

I secured my #7 from Ebay after an auction closed without a winning bid. I just emailed the seller, offered $50 and he agreed. I bought my #8 from Patrick Leach. Dealing with Patrick eliminates guesswork; if he says it just needs to be honed then put to work then you know that's all it needs.

Good luck and keep us posted.

[Don Dorn]

Good stuff guys. Thanks for the input. Again, I thought this would be the project that really required a jointer. I've been watching eBay and the classifieds here for a Bailey 7 or 8 for a while. I'll pull the trigger when I find it for sure.

While others will most likely disagree, I think if you are going to ever buy a premium plane, the jointer should be it. Buying one without being able to determine it's flatness is a crap shoot - if you buy one that is premium, it's not only ductile iron which is resistant to warping, but will be flat.

I had a LV Bevel Up Jointer and loved it - I did actually sell it because I was lucky enough to get a very nice #8 and didn't need both. You can flatten the sole of planes #5 and lower fairly effectively, but there are very few people (Jim) that can get that done with a #7 or #8. Buying this one in a more premium plane eliminates those concerns.

[Charlie Stanford]

"A jointer should have been the first plane you bought, not the last."

Personally, I find the jack (#5) the most used and versatile so would recommend it as a first plane.

The late Alan Peters would disagree with you. And me as well, but I don't matter.

[Sean Hughto]

Ian Kirby too I believe.

[Jason Coen]

"A jointer should have been the first plane you bought, not the last."

Personally, I find the jack (#5) the most used and versatile so would recommend it as a first plane.

It depends. I use my jack probably the least of all, but then I don't process rough stock by hand. Someone that is 100% neander, though, would certainly find far more value there than I. The #8 sees the most use.

[David Weaver]

The late Alan Peters would disagree with you. And me as well, but I don't matter.

It the intent is to do something other than smoothing (as in, not a woodworker who will only use a plane to smooth after machines get done with wood), I agree with you too. The last sentence was worth a chuckle.

[Bobby O'Neal]

Bobby,

I wondered then same thing about getting a jointer...for a while...until I got one. Now I look for excuses to use it (them). They are just so macho.

Anyway...in my search for a #8, I picked up 3 in a lot at a Martin Donnelly auction. If you are interested in one of them, send me a PM. I'd tune it up for you and get it ready to "rock and roll".

Thanks Harold. PM sent.

[Charlie Stanford]

It the intent is to do something other than smoothing (as in, not a woodworker who will only use a plane to smooth after machines get done with wood), I agree with you too. The last sentence was worth a chuckle.

And I meant it. All of this chipbreaker stuff has me re-reading Krenov, Peters (what I have) Roger Holmes (who trained under Peters) on all of these subjects. This is a good thing. I don't think Krenov let anything slip of of the shop with tearout which would have been particulary egregious given the style in which he built.

[David Weaver]

I missed the tearout discussion in this thread, I'm talking about flat.

The point here is that a jointer will be easier for a beginner (and everyone else) to use to make long and wide things flat. It may not be necessary depending on how subjective that is, but for the vast majority on here, making things out of wood isn't necessary. Why suffer a short plane though a long plane's job, only to have to check and check to see if the job is satisfactory?

[Charlie Stanford]

I missed the tearout discussion in this thread, I'm talking about flat.

The point here is that a jointer will be easier for a beginner (and everyone else) to use to make long and wide things flat. It may not be necessary depending on how subjective that is, but for the vast majority on here, making things out of wood isn't necessary. Why suffer a short plane though a long plane's job, only to have to check and check to see if the job is satisfactory?

Just synthesizing and tying in threads. Feel free to ignore.

Peters and Holmes said everything about the long plane I personally ever needed to hear. But the OP may not have the luxury of a library, old FW mags, or an online subscription, or whatever.

I'm more than happy to have steered (if in fact I did, I don't know) the OP to Peters and Holmes on the subject -- two reliable sources for sure.

[David Weaver]

library, old FW mags, or an online subscription, or whatever......Peters and Holmes on the subject -- two reliable sources for sure.

On the first, many of us don't. On the second, for sure. Why not seek out the doers?