The new LV planes

[Chris Griggs]

I'd be interested in hearing why they chose to include a cap iron.

I don't know the whole story but I do know that the decision to include the cap iron was something they spent a lot of time evaluating.

I first heard about these a little over 3 years ago, before I had learned to use a cap iron effectively. In my earliest discussion with them about these I said that thought they should make a BD plane with an adjustable throat piece and no cap iron. Their response at the time was that that was the plan.

Interestingly this conversation with them happend probably about a month before Dave started explaining to me how to use a cap iron via PM. Literally, in my next conversation with them just a few weeks later, I told them that I had done a 180 in my thoughts on a capiron, and that I felt they definitely needed to at least have it as an option. A few months after that the Kato video started getting lots of play, Dave's cap iron article was published to Wood Central, and our little sector of the internet was flooded with cap iron discussions. I don't know when the decision to include a cap iron was made and I don't know what solidified the decision but I do know that they were reading, listening, and doing there own testing throughout that time period.

I have little doubt the folks like you, Kees, Warren, and all of us in the market who started valuing it as an essential part of a BD plane, weighed heavily in their decision making process.

[Bruce Mack]

:Bruce:
the reason to buy LV over LN comes down to small but significant differences in engineering. the adjustable mouth *is* a reason, as are the lateral adjustment set screws. their cap iron/norris-esque adjuster setup looks like they have put a fair bit of work into getting it right- I suspect that it will work well in use.
aesthetics is an entirely subjective thing. buck rogers modern or steampunk retro- is one wrong?

Bridger - I was abrupt and likely wrong. If the Norris mechanism was finely tuned and allowed some on the fly adjustment, I would be a potential buyer. (I've had trouble using the Norris)

[Jim Belair]

I'm kind of a lightweight at all this compared to many of you guys, but haven't the vast majority of bevel down bench planes made in the past 100 years included a cap iron? I'd have been more surprised if they hadn't included one.

[David Weaver]

I don't know the whole story but I do know that the decision to include the cap iron was something they spent a lot of time evaluating.

I first heard about these a little over 3 years ago, before I had learned to use a cap iron effectively. In my earliest discussion with them about these I said that thought they should make a BD plane with an adjustable throat piece and no cap iron. Their response at the time was that that was the plan.

Interestingly this conversation with them happend probably about a month before Dave started explaining to me how to use a cap iron via PM. Literally, in my next conversation with them just a few weeks later, I told them that I had done a 180 in my thoughts on a capiron, and that I felt they definitely needed to at least have it as an option. A few months after that the Kato video started getting lots of play, Dave's cap iron article was published to Wood Central, and our little sector of the internet was flooded with cap iron discussions. I don't know when the decision to include a cap iron was made and I don't know what solidified the decision but I do know that they were reading, listening, and doing there own testing throughout that time period.

I have little doubt the folks like you, Kees, Warren, and all of us in the market who started valuing it as an essential part of a BD plane, weighed heavily in their decision making process.

Whatever the reason, I'm glad to see that they're offering planes with cap irons, though they have been for a while and I just never bought one for really no good reason (the old BD plane that they had).

But now you can really get one however you like. It was suggested on another forum that these discussions may have put a dent in BU sales, and whether that is or isn't the case isn't something that I'm concerned about, but even if it was, I know they listen to the market, and as long as the market exists, so will they.

[David Dalzell]

I believe that all these questions, assumptions, beliefs, theories, and suppositions will be definitivly answered when we gain a consensus on how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.

[Bruce Mack]

Bruce -

Short answer: You wouldn't.

The "aesthetics" [spelling corrected] are in the eye of the eye of the beholder. The slanted tote and moveable toe will appeal to a lot of people.

Some people really appreciate the modernization of the age-old designs. Some people appreciate the detailed refinement of the age-old designs.

Me? - I gots me a wall fulla LN, with a couple LV interspersed where that product suited me better. And a couple prized Keen Kutters.

You clearly would never be interested in an LV product, which is just ducky from my perspective. Your ad hominem argument carries little weight - you offered nothing of value in the thread.

Carry on. Be well. Leave these LV fans some Lee-way [rim-shot].

Kent-Your Arthurian avatar explains your preference for European spelling but not your rudeness. That is homegrown. I do own Veritas planes and like Lee Valley's panoply of woodworking products. Here however they're late for the train. My best to you.
Bruce

[Kees Heiden]

Anyone know when they will be available in Europe?

[David Weaver]

I believe that all these questions, assumptions, beliefs, theories, and suppositions will be definitivly answered when we gain a consensus on how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.

The answer is clearly 42.

[Adam Cruea]

I had a definite opinion about the weight of planes in the early conversations I had with them before receiving the prototype. My personal advice to them was not to not be reckless with weight. I think I said something along the lines of "I like some added weight in smoothers, but in 6, 7, and 8s, I'm always found the weight of the modern bedrocks to be heavier than I like." So, with that in mind, its no surprise that I like the weight of the No. 4 a lot, I don't remember if I ever weighed it, but I'm surprised to see that it's listed at 4.5 lbs...the plane does feel weighty but its well balanced so it doesn't feel clunky or overly heavy...its a very nice feeling smoother. I wish I could comment on the weight of larger planes (which indeed sound pretty darn heavy on paper, especially the No. 7) but again I've only used the 4.

I should add that overall I am super thrilled with how this line turned out. Really love having that adjustable throat, and while it might not be the most exciting aspect in terms of cool new features I am MOST thrilled with the tote choices. I absolutely love the large Stanley style tote I have on mine. Its amazing how something like a choice grip, that may appear somewhat benign can have such an impact on user experience.

If I may ask. . .what's wrong with a weightier plane?

I find my 7s and 8s to be an excellent weight; and I have a 7 with a thinner casting (curved Bedrock) that almost feels a little light to me. I have the LN 4 1/2 smoother and I honestly love the 5 1/2 pounds (that actually a real reason I love my #51. . .over 9 pounds of iron love, baby!)

I realize everyone has a preference here, so I'm more just curious as I may be able to incorporate something new into how I do things. Just keep in mind, I'm the same guy that has a mortise mallet made from 2 chunks of 7 inch 8/4 hickory glued together.

[Warren Mickley]

Kees, here are some thoughts on the planes. I written some of this stuff other years on other fora and I am not sure what you have seen. I think the ideal angle for a plane is somewhere around 40 degrees. I have long thought that the reason the Bailey plane used 45 was to give cushion to those who honed at angles above 30 degrees. I have seen videos of well known hand tool teachers who apparently hone freehand way over 30 degrees maybe even closer to 40 degrees. My own experiments in 1977 indicated that clearance problems were definitely noticed at 8 degrees not noticed at 10 degrees.

Some time around 1982 I altered a Bailey plane to cut at 42 degrees and have used it ever since. I think there is a very modest gain to surface quality compared to a 45 degree plane. Of course the lower the planing angle, the more important the honing angle (because of clearance). I have used freehand honing all my life, but I think a honing jig user could easily handle a 40 degree bed angle.

On thing that jumped out to me about the new plane was the shortness of the iron. Like five inches or even a little less. Perhaps to guys who are using their little jigs it would not matter, but for me this short iron would represent a significant loss of angular control when honing. I can't imagine what the designer was thinking.

[David Weaver]

I can't imagine what the designer was thinking.

Clearance for the adjuster, I'd imagine.

[Kees Heiden]

In Europe there is a long standing tradition for 49-50 degree planes. From the single iron planes of the 17th century, via the york pitch, to the German reform smoothers of today. No idea really what the relevance of that history is though. Japanese prefer lower angles, with a good reason I presume (and they plane hardwoods too!).

[David Weaver]

Surface appearance on unfinished wood is important to them, especially in architectural context. In our discussions on here, you often see "who cares, it all looks the same once you finish it", but at least historically, there's some japanese work that doesn't get finished.

There is a pretty significant difference between a common pitch stanley plane and a kanna at 8/10 bu on some woods. On harder woods, not so much. The brightness of the surface demands that the smoothing is done well because imperfections show up pretty easily. It's not usually any trouble unless you get a deeper-than-expected cut at some point (something that happens if you chance leaving a piece to be smoothed later and it moves).

[Matthew N. Masail]

I'd like to comment on the use of a lower angle plane, surface finish asaid. I made a couple lower angle planes, one block plane at 40 and a jack at about 42-43. both of them cut very very well, the low angle seems to bite into the wood more easily and gives a butter like action. I have not done ANY tearout tests as these plane are no longer in use, the jack was a prototype and the block was a commission, but if tear-out can be controlled with a 40-42 angle it sure would make a nice plane to use.


I also very much like larger wooden planes with a single Iron (I used the LV irons) bedded at 50. I made 1 try plane and 1 jointer, both were great and both sold. a single iron is nice when using the plane for stock prep and such, and 50 degree doesn't tear much at all with most regular woods.


Back to the New Planes. I looked at the instructions, seems like you might need to remove the cap iron holder in order to hollow grind on a wide tool rest. seems like they changed it so the plane can be used without the breaker as well. I'm not sure if it's fiddely or not, but seems like it might be. I'm looking forward to reading some real life reviews.

[Matthew N. Masail]

Surface appearance on unfinished wood is important to them, especially in architectural context. In our discussions on here, you often see "who cares, it all looks the same once you finish it", but at least historically, there's some japanese work that doesn't get finished.

There is a pretty significant difference between a common pitch stanley plane and a kanna at 8/10 bu on some woods. On harder woods, not so much. The brightness of the surface demands that the smoothing is done well because imperfections show up pretty easily. It's not usually any trouble unless you get a deeper-than-expected cut at some point (something that happens if you chance leaving a piece to be smoothed later and it moves).

David you are right, I read a book about Japanese temple making, and the wood goes mostly unfinished. the reason in the book for the proper finishing cut was more than cosmetic (though that is important too), the master temple maker claimed that if the fibers are properly severed with the finishing cut, it will cause them to become more resistant to moisture since the cut is clean with no voids, or something along those lines. the book discuses the Yairi Kanna for non flat surfaces and the skill needed to use it.