Page 3 of 14 FirstFirst 123456713 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 203

Thread: The Sacrilege!

  1. #31
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Chevy Chase, Maryland
    Posts
    2,484
    Quote Originally Posted by David Weaver View Post
    I'm struggling a little bit to find something where a new tool allows someone to do finer work (presuming that the "old" tool it's compared to is undamaged).
    YES, THIS. We don't have to try to devine "better" by fickle choices of newbies who can have as many planes as they like (i.e., are not limited to one). We can get specific and empirical: Take like planes and run them through their paces. What can a LN 5 do that a Stanley 5 cannot, or do better? What can a Veritas LA jointer do that a Stanley 7 cannot, or do better? Etc. ad infinitum.


    If more expensive and fancier means better results, does that mean we should all aspire to Norris infills and what have you?


    I used to think that the one place where something like an LN might actually perform better was in smoothing super difficult grained woods. I haven't done the the tests, but I'm skeptical about even that these days.


    So why do I have LNs in addition to my vintage planes? They are a bit tighter feeling in use in some circumstances, for one - not that this affects the result really. Things like far less backlash on the depth adjustment wheel and so forth. They are also often a bit more foolproof having been made to tight tolerances with somewhat superior castings and materials - again, the cut is not affected. I can get a used base model Honda accord that is nice to use and gets me there everytime; I can get a brand new luxury model Honda Accord that gets me from place to place no better and not particularly differently as far as aesthetic feel, but sometimes, leather seats and such are nice, even if unnecessary.

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    22,492
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by Christopher Charles View Post
    Here, perhaps, is the key sentence:

    "They will wait for me to sharpen them and then pick them out of my tool chest. "


    Too true . I can certainly see why he shelved the article several times. As with Festool, EZ Smart and Old Arn, discussions of new versus old in the hand tool arena causes even the meekest craftsman to rise and voice his opinion. Some hornet's nests should not be poked .
    "A hen is only an egg's way of making another egg".


    – Samuel Butler

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Willow Spring, NC
    Posts
    735
    What I have observed is this: The students with the super-tuned vintage handplanes almost always tend to use – over and over – my Lie-Nielsen and Veritas planes during the class. They will wait for me to sharpen them and then pick them out of my tool chest.
    CS is not saying that all the students grab his 'new' planes, just the ones that have spent time and effort to 'super-tune' their own vintage planes. I would maybe count myself in that group. If given the opportunity to "use my tools. You don’t have to ask. Just take them and return them when you are done.”, I would take advantage of that opportunity in a heartbeat. Wouldn't you like to have the chance to compare the vintage plane that you have worked so hard on with a properly tuned premium plane? I know I certainly would.

    According to that blog, CS allows students to use his premium tools, I don't see anything in that blog that indicates that he pushes them to do so. He actually states that he does not.
    Last edited by Mark Engel; 04-11-2014 at 8:50 AM.

  4. #34
    I think CS blog posts get a stronger response than the great BU vs. BD debate.

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    NE Ohio
    Posts
    1,029
    That's really the point. All else (like cost) being equal, I would be very likely to choose a new premium plane. They are beautifully designed and manufactured and I'm sure they are a pleasure to use. The one exception might be the weight. The premium planes are often heavier than their vintage counter parts and sometimes a lighter tool is an advantage.

    I look to the 100+ years that vintage Stanley Bailey style planes have been in the hands of craftsman. Homes and museums are filled with the things made with these tools. I can't point to one that would have been better if only they had a LN jointer or a LV BU smoother.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sean Hughto View Post
    YES, THIS. We don't have to try to devine "better" by fickle choices of newbies who can have as many planes as they like (i.e., are not limited to one). We can get specific and empirical: Take like planes and run them through their paces. What can a LN 5 do that a Stanley 5 cannot, or do better? What can a Veritas LA jointer do that a Stanley 7 cannot, or do better? Etc. ad infinitum.


    If more expensive and fancier means better results, does that mean we should all aspire to Norris infills and what have you?


    I used to think that the one place where something like an LN might actually perform better was in smoothing super difficult grained woods. I haven't done the the tests, but I'm skeptical about even that these days.


    So why do I have LNs in addition to my vintage planes? They are a bit tighter feeling in use in some circumstances, for one - not that this affects the result really. Things like far less backlash on the depth adjustment wheel and so forth. They are also often a bit more foolproof having been made to tight tolerances with somewhat superior castings and materials - again, the cut is not affected. I can get a used base model Honda accord that is nice to use and gets me there everytime; I can get a brand new luxury model Honda Accord that gets me from place to place no better and not particularly differently as far as aesthetic feel, but sometimes, leather seats and such are nice, even if unnecessary.
    -- Dan Rode

    "We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, then, is not an act, but a habit." - Aristotle

  6. #36
    But is it a "Bedrock" rock? Otherwise I do not think you will get acceptable performance from him. ......... 😳😁

  7. #37
    His point and purpose of the post is right there at the end:

    "Get a ton of handplane information from my book “Handplane Essentials,” on sale in paperback at..."
    "The real voyage of discovery consists not in seeking new landscapes, but in having new eyes." - Proust

  8. #38
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Chicago-ish
    Posts
    352
    The fact that he is saying this during the season of LN roadshows is... perhaps just a coincidence.
    clamp the work
    to relax the mind

  9. #39
    Quote Originally Posted by Sean Hughto View Post
    I haven't done the the tests, but I'm skeptical about even that these days.
    for good reason. There is no difference in either a LN or a plain stanley (in decent shape) to handle difficult grain.

    That said, the LN bench planes are fine pieces of gear, I really like them a lot. If I had infinite money, I would've kept mine, but I'm to the point where I prefer the overall experience (quick sharpening, ease of mind if they get a few dots of rust, etc) of the vintage planes.

    But I must give LN credit, when they were focusing on bringing good capable planes to market, before they got into this whole excess gadget and road show stuff, I was impressed - they did a good job. The high priced gadgetry that they're adding on now, and running around demonstrating their 8 as a smoother, etc, and telling people that the cap iron is too fiddly - not so much. (not to mention the fact that they put a video out suggesting that people shouldn't grind their irons). They're in the weeds now, but their bench planes are still great if that's your desire.

  10. #40
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Chevy Chase, Maryland
    Posts
    2,484
    CS from 2010 had it about right:

    The final revelation came when I put Krenov’s handplane through the same paces as I did the other tools. By comparison, Krenov’s small polishing plane (7 1/2″ long) is crudely made – the wooden stock looks like it was roughed out with a band saw and knife. The chipbreaker on the iron was roughly ground with many little facets. The mouth was tight (1?32″) but not extraordinarily so. When I disassembled the plane I found that the bed down by the mouth had a layer or two of blue painter’s tape affixed there, perhaps to close up the throat.

    But the plane held its own with every other plane on my bench in terms of performance. As did my “work-a-day” tools from Veritas and Lie-Nielsen. The same goes for other high-end tools I’ve already written about: the Ray Iles A5, the Clark & Williams smoothing plane and the new Bridge City variable-pitch plane, which I had only limited time with. Even my vintage Stanleys had nothing to be ashamed of.
    I discussed this finding with several toolmakers, none of whom were surprised by it. Robin Lee, the president of Lee Valley Tools, summed it up this way: “The wood doesn’t care.” And he’s right. Thomas Lie-Nielsen, founder and owner of Lie-Nielsen Toolworks, put it this way: “A plane is just a jig for a chisel.” And he’s right, too.

    If your planes meet the minimum basic requirements of a plane: a sharp cutter that’s firmly secured at an appropriate angle for the wood you’re working, the tool will do an excellent job. So if you think that buying a very expensive plane will make all lumber bow down before you and your tool, think again.

    popularwoodworking.com/tools/tool-reviews/test-driving_exotic_infill_handplanes
    Last edited by Keith Outten; 04-11-2014 at 12:03 PM.

  11. #41
    Side note, the "plane is just a jig for a chisel" thing wears me out. It's really not, it's an oversimplification of how important the plane's design is, and chisels generally aren't used like planes and certainly don't have the tearout mitigation that a double iron has.

  12. #42
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Chevy Chase, Maryland
    Posts
    2,484
    Quote Originally Posted by David Weaver View Post
    Side note, the "plane is just a jig for a chisel" thing wears me out. It's really not, it's an oversimplification of how important the plane's design is, and chisels generally aren't used like planes and certainly don't have the tearout mitigation that a double iron has.
    Kind of a semantic quibble, no? We have all seen plane shaped objects that do not work at all. I think the TLN's quip assumes a "good" jig, if you will. And I don't think he means chisel literally, but just as a shorthand for a good piece of steel with a sharpened edge.

  13. #43
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Stone Mountain, GA
    Posts
    751
    Fairly soon I should be able to see if this comparison holds true for me; I recently acquired my first premium plane, a LN #4. I have a couple of other premium specialty planes, but my bench planes have all been vintage Stanley so far- #4, #5-1/2, and a #7. I've spent a lot of time getting these in shape (mostly trial-and-error and messing around, since these were my first real planes) and I've got them working pretty sweetly. I can confirm what others have said about the chipbreaker enabling these planes to work difficult grain; honestly, I don't even think about grain direction much when planing anymore- except for the 5-1/2, where blade camber prevents the chipbreaker from getting very close to the edge. These planes work very well for what I might call functional planing- getting a board to dimension, squaring an edge up, removing pencil/tool marks, etc. But I still have some slight troubles with my Stanley 4 in taking very fine, full-width shavings for finishing a surface. And, at random times it leaves inexplicable plane tracks, despite my having rounded and cambered the iron, and even rounding the corners of the chipbreaker. On occasion I will resort to smoothing with the #7 as it just seems to work better despite having no camber and sharp corners- I can't really explain it.

    So I bought the LN #4 specifically to use for these very fine smoothing cuts. I figure the Stanley will still see a lot of use, just left to a slightly coarser setting. This should reduce the amount of fiddling with setups, and reduce the amount of sharpening for each blade. I still need to do the final prep work on the LN's blade, and then I guess I'll see if there's anything magical about the premium plane, or if setting for very fine shavings is just fiddly business in general...

  14. #44
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    In my basement
    Posts
    736
    Quote Originally Posted by Pat Barry View Post
    I venture to say, that everyone here would also choose to use the new plane if it were available for them to do so, simply because it is new and different. I bet even David would sneak a new LV or LN plan out for a test drive given the opportunity. The real question is would he keep going back for it or would his curiosity be satisfied by the one test drive. I bet, just like Lays potato chips - you can't eat just one. In fact I would be highly disappointed in the experts here who wouldn't test drive the newest model time and time again given the opportunity - after all, what kind of expert can you be to not know anything about the subject except what you have read from other 'expert's?
    Curiosity would be satisfied, and that's based on personal experience.

    I've tried LN and LV planes. Yay! Bells and whistles! Cool factor.

    Then I go back to my old, crusty hand planes, thank them for being useful and trustworthy, and go back to work. The only exception where I'll drool over a brand-new premium plane is when it costs less than the tried-and-true; like the LN/LV shooting planes. You can get a Stanley shooter for $1500, or slap down $200/$500 for a better plane that's been re-engineered to be more than just heavier and tighter tolerances (mainly, in this case, the blade-holding amphibian has been remade with something better).

    Please keep in mind, I prefer driving my Harley-Davidson over my wife's Cadillac any time of the year. Rain. Cold. Heat. Wind. Don't care. I'd gladly take the minimalist, non-luxurious ride. Some people are like that.
    The Barefoot Woodworker.

    Fueled by leather, chrome, and thunder.

  15. #45
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Longview WA
    Posts
    27,347
    Blog Entries
    1

    Okay, Here Is My

    two cents.jpg

    Out of curiosity a new plane would be picked up and given a test ride. This is one of the reasons for me to travel to a Tool Event. They always perform quite well and the cutting action is dampened by the weight of the plane and the iron being bedded solidly.

    There is a difference of feel between wood bodied planes, old bench planes and the new offerings. For me the old planes look nice with their 'layers' of history. It is fine with me if someone wants to strip off a century of patina and make it look shiny new again.

    The Bailey shape is also pleasing to me.

    The new planes do have a lot going for them. Tighter tolerances for their adjustments. Extra features like the set screws on the Veritas planes to hold lateral adjustments.

    Same with my old chisels, they are a bit dull with pits and imperfect surfaces. They work just the same.

    It all kind of makes me think of a shaving commercial from half a century past:

    My new chisel of super steel holds the keenest edge forever. The surfaces are like mirrors. I was so entranced at my smiling reflection that I didn't even notice the end of my finger went missing.

    jtk
    Last edited by Jim Koepke; 04-11-2014 at 1:15 PM.
    "A pessimist sees the difficulty in every opportunity; an optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty."
    - Sir Winston Churchill (1874-1965)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •