Stanley 80

[lowell holmes]

Don't miss David Charlesworth's article in the current issue of Pop Woodworking. It is about setting up scraper planes. I set my 80 up like he said and it leaves full width, curly shavings now.

I almost blew by it, but decided to set my 80 up using the article, and the difference is spectacular.

[James Taglienti]

I will take a look at it- I can barely get half of the cutter's width on my scrapers.

[Roy Wall]

I know I missed the article.......I'll go back and check - Thanks Lowell!

[Tri Hoang]

I have the LV equivalent but only skim over his recent article. I don't see the point of getting full width shavings. As long as the center cuts & the sides do not dig, I'm happy. Perhaps I do not use it as extensively as I should.

[lowell holmes]

I would not expect a LV cabinet scraper requires the same effort to make work.

I had trouble with my Stanley 80 chattering. I don't have that now. The full width shaving isn't as important as getting consisitant fine shavings without chatter.

[Tom Henderson2]

The article is a nice complement to his discussion on scraper planes in his latest DVD, "Furniture Making: Five Topics."

I had nothing but trouble with my large scraper plane until I tried his methods -- first time success.

-TH

[David Nelson1]

I would have to assume you are talking about the hard copy of the magazine. I'll look for it on the way home this afternoon. I need all the help I can get.

Don't miss David Charlesworth's article in the current issue of Pop Woodworking. It is about setting up scraper planes. I set my 80 up like he said and it leaves full width, curly shavings now.

I almost blew by it, but decided to set my 80 up using the article, and the difference is spectacular.

[lowell holmes]

Yes. it's the hard copy of the current magazine.

Most of us do need the help.

[Mike Brady]

Full width? How is that possible with the thumbscrew on the #80 cambering the blade? That would be a pretty heavy shaving in the middle. I can see a scraper planing taking a wide shaving, but anything wider than about 1-1/2" seems unlikely with an #80; but then again, I haven't read the article.

[lowell holmes]

In my exhuberance, I exaggerated the width of the shaving, but not the performance of the scraper. please forgive me.

[Darnell Hagen]

I picked up that mag a couple of days ago, this weekend I have a date with my LV version of the 80. Of all the tools I've sharpened and used, that's the only one that I still haven't figured out.

[Mike Brady]

I love the LV #80. It is far better than the original. It should be the easiest scraper plane to use. Did you know that Chris Schwarz's name is on the patent?

Tell me where you are having a the problem with it. It really is quite easy to set up.

[Paul Saffold]

Lowell, that is very impressive. I've never had results like that with a scraper. Well maybe with paint but that's a different matter .
Is the blade a replacement or original?
Thanks for posting.
Paul

[Don Dorn]

I have the issue and read the article. The last thing I wish to do is start a big debate here, but I guess I'd like someone to explain to me why the burr facing the wood MUST to come from a 45 degree bevel.

Due to the tougher nature of jointing a 45 degree when necessary, I tried flipping the blade around so that the flat edge is down. I jointed it and put a burr on it like any other card scraper (although it's barely off 90 degrees). Since it sits in the #80 at an angle anyway, I discovered that there was little/no difference in performance. When it gets dull, I can flip it around and have one more side to work with before having to joint it again, then due to the 90 edge, it takes a minute or so and I have two fresh edges again.

I'll be the first to admit that I'm no expert on this, but getting a good and quick burr on a scraper is no issue for me. I do use the piece of paper to set the 80 like the article said and put a very slight camber on using the screw and pushes shavings like a house a' fire. After I get the basic job done, I lessen the camber (wasn't much to begin with) and lighten the strokes or go to a card scraper for more control. It's certainly working for me, but again, my basic philosophy on this may be flawed.

[Tom Henderson2]

I have the issue and read the article. The last thing I wish to do is start a big debate here, but I guess I'd like someone to explain to me why the burr facing the wood MUST to come from a 45 degree bevel.

It doesn't Don -- there are few, if any real hard-and-fast rules in woodworking.

If everything is working wonderfully for you, ignore the article.

If you would like to see some improvement, try what the author suggests.

Easy!