The new LV planes

[Adam Cruea]

I'd imagine the 50 degree frog is left out because it's not very effective *without* using the cap iron.

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

This is one reason I like 50* frogs (and got a LN 4 1/2 with a York pitch). It's a great all-around smoother and when the grain gets super-gnarly, it just keeps right on going.

I think this is a good move by LV. I also like that they offer the LV type totes and the Stanley-esque type totes.

[Judson Green]

Nice innovations but unlikely I will come into the need or money to purchase one.

jtk

Agreed neat planes, and neat idea I'm sure it'll be a hit but that's too much cabbage for this rust hunter.

[Alan Schwabacher]

You can order a plane with a frog at whatever angle you want for only a $10 surcharge. I think they've listened and thought carefully before coming out with this.

[Paul Murphy]

I'm hoping to see a review of the 4-1/2 with a 50 degree frog. The bevel-down is so much easier to camber (my opinion anyway) that I think is will make a wonderful final smoother.
I already want one, all my other nice planes are LVBU models and all are excellent (favorite so far is low angle smoother).
The new planes look well designed and user friendly, nice work LV!

[David Weaver]

You can bet that they've made what people have requested, that's what a good company does. People complain about the handles, and people probably wanted bevel down with a bunch of pitches (because they see that LN has those).

They've got some folks who like planes that have a straight up or near it pitch, because they've always pushed that, so naturally they give everyone what they want. I wouldn't be surprised to see the BU planes following suit with handles and knobs, and perhaps even a 20 degree clearance (but I doubt that last part).

[Malcolm Schweizer]

I love what they have done. I love the look, the options, the customization. I darned near bought a 4 1\2, but I have a few other more needed tools, and $250 worth of wood yet to buy for a few projects.

What I do not like is that they seem to be lacking in sidewall support- especially the jointer. They seem thin on the front, and the sides sure do taper off a lot. I mentioned on the other thread that the front appears to move in the "choosing a knob and tote" video, but I assume it is just rocking on the blade. Start at 0:22 and see it move when he pushes down. Surely it isn't actually flexing is it? It has to just be rocking on the blade or the bench is not flat.

Funny- LV comes out with this huge improvement, and LN changes their website so that I have yet to find the button to click to see their tools. I have a gift certificate to spend and can't find anything other than the "featured tools" on their site.

[bridger berdel]

these are clever. I like that they shifted the mouth adjustment from the frog to the toe, but I don't like that doing so added more moving parts to the plane. having the toe easily moveable seems like it will make clearing jams without resetting the blade more convenient, as well as giving one more variable to work with in the quest for a perfectly tuned plane. the frog might as well be integral to the sole. they could still offer custom angles, it would just be one more round in the cnc machining center before shipping. the extra cost of that would likely be offset by the savings from eliminating the two part frog machining. the idea of swapping frogs in use being practical is fantasy, imho. they tout the wide sides being ideal for shooting, but I'd like the sides of my shooting plane to also be wide at the heel and toe, not just alongside the frog. a tilting tote would also be on my list for a shooting plane. add to that the unfortunate truth that my plane till is already full, as are several drawers, boxes and shelves, and my tool budget is empty and it doesn't look like I'll be buying one of these any time soon.


personally, I would like to see a frog pitched for scraping, and one that pushes the low limit. an ultra low angle plane would likely need a cutter made of a specialty steel to be able to hold an edge at say 20 degrees. it seems that metallurgy is advancing to the point that such a steel is probably not far off. I suspect that a 20 degree plane with a close set chipbreaker would yield a very nice surface in even tempered woods, which is most of what I work with.

:Kees:
there is a place for heavy planes. that said, I also prefer for most of mine to be lighter, especially the ones that will be used for any length of time.

:George:
the state of fashion in the plane world has shifted back to bevel down with chipbreaker. Kato and Kawai, and the internet discussions have definitely been a major force in this. I'm pretty sure it was internet buzz that drove the development of the current state of the bevel up, no chipbreaker planes too...

: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?

[Frank Martin]

I am primarily a power tool guy but I also have nearly all of the bevel up planes and several others from Veritas. I think these planes are really innovative from an engineering perspective even if customization were not available. I definitely don't have the need, but may get the no. 4 smooter to see how these work and feel different from the bevel up planes. Although, I still love the simplicity of the bevel up planes. Now at least they have an option for most folks who prefer different styles and options.

[John Coloccia]

It is gratifying to see that LY has apparently been inspired(is that the word? Perhaps influenced) to introduce new BD planes. I'll warrant it is in no small degree due to discussions here led by David,Kees,Warren,and the Japanese video.

I agree. What struck me most by looking at the videos is how similar a well setup0 BD iron and chipbreaker function to a well setup scraper. I have nothing in particular against BU planes, but their lineup was just woefully incomplete without the BD planes. One thing I question, though, is looking at the casting there doesn't appear to be any good place to grab the plane when it's on it's side, such as when you're using a shooting board. Normally, I like having more casting in front of the chip breaker so my fingers have something to grip. I like the streamlined look, but I'm not so sure I'd be happy with that one aspect of the design.

[Jim Belair]

I have nothing in particular against BU planes, but their lineup was just woefully incomplete without the BD planes.

Other posters have chimed in how great it is that Veritas have come out with planes that use cap irons in light of the research, etc.

But don't these (that have been in their line up for years) count?

[John Coloccia]

Other posters have chimed in how great it is that Veritas have come out with planes that use cap irons in light of the research, etc.

But don't these (that have been in their line up for years) count?

I typed too fast. I should have said something more like "without THESE BD planes". Their old lineup was a not as complete (it's still a bit incomplete, but...), and honestly there are some design quirks which I didn't really like. For all the things that LV does really well, I thought their BD planes were not all that great. These new ones seem to be very nice. It's no mistake that a lot of my BU planes were LV, but all of my BD were LN. If I buy another BD plane, these new ones demand serious consideration, IMHO.

[Kevin Harris]

I also like the holes for the optional fence, not so much for use with the fence, but I plan to make up some aluminum depth skids for planing small and thin parts to consistent thickness.

[Kevin Harris]

And I also like the accessory slow adjusting norris adjuster as I think that will make adjustments for thin shavings easier. Unfortunately it looks like you have to buy that separately and then swap it for the one in the plane - I wish they had that as a configurable option in ordering the new plane. I'll have to go into a store and ask if I can order the plane with the slow adjuster.

[Chris Griggs]

Alright guys, I'm back in Philly, so I'm going to go through this thread and try to answer questions about these planes based on my experience using a prototype of the No. 4 in my shop over the past few months. As of right now, I don't plan to write a full Derek-esc review, maybe I will later, but really I just don't have time to do so right now, and I think there is more information to be gathered just by answering questions people may have.

There are some points of critique though and questions. Just a first impression of course.
-I don't see a 50 degree frog. I think that would be more usefull then a 55 degree one. I really like my 49 degree Ullmia smoother. It makes setting the chipbreaker a bit more forgiving without adding a whole lot resistance.
- The instructions say to position the chipbreaker at 1/64" or 0.5mm. That's not helpfull. We know that you won't get too much help from the chipbreaker at that point, it merely helps to limit the amount of tearout. It's better to write a number in the manual that really does something spectaculair, like 1/128" or less.
- I see many little bits and pieces and wonder how complex it is?
- Can you set the chipbreaker outside of the plane so you can actually see what you are doing? The manual suggest that you set it inside the plane.
- A 40 degree frog for shooting? Hmmm, anyone going to switch frogs for shooting? Or just sharpen the blade and get on with work.

So anyway, I'll start with Kee's questions.

I can say without hesitation that I found nothing to be overly complex about the plane. I just looked at the instructions for the first time and I very much see why it seems complex, but in reality everything in terms of setup and changeover is very easy and intuitive. My protoype didn't come with instructions and I had zero issue setting things up and changing frogs over quickly (my prototype came with a 45 degree and 55 degree frogs). That said I don't really like to bother with changing frogs so while I did mess with the 55 degree frog I mainly used the 45 degree and controlled tearout with depth of cut and mouth adjustments....


....which brings me to me next comment...that is, I can't comment on how the cap iron setting works inside vs outside the plane as my prototype did not come with a cap iron. When I get a production one I will most certainly be making use of of the cap iron, but I will add that having so much control of the mouth did make it easier to get by without a cap iron when using the 45 degree frog...again, when I get one with a cap iron I will use it, but the BU style adjustable mouth on a BD plane REALLY is a nice feature.

This probably goes without saying, but I do btw agree with you Kees about the distance of the cap iron..for fine to medium fine work anyway...heavier works another conversation.

The new #4 = 4 lbs 5 oz. That's 1.94 kg.

The old Stanley #4's are 1.7 kg. My wooden smoother is 0.8 kg. These planes seem to get heavier all the time!
My old infill is 2.2 kg. That's really a heavy sucker.

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.

[Kent A Bathurst]

So why would I buy a LV plane when LN has a similar range of bevel down planes with interchangeable frogs, comparable prices, and (in my opinion) superior esthetics? Not for the slanted tote or the moveable toe.

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].