Results 1 to 13 of 13

Thread: Wadkin planer

  1. #1

    Wadkin planer

    I am looking at a Wadkin 9x18" planer on Craigslist.it appears to be a UO/3 from the 50's or 60's. Not sure yet if it has a 2 or 3 knife head.According to online info, the three speed gearbox has a low of 20 ft/min., and the cutterhead spins at 4500 or 5000 rpm. I currently have a Makita 2040 400 mm planer, which is an underpowered screamer and dismally slow, but does give an excellent finish on most woods, as good as any straight knife planer I have worked with. Is there any possibility that the Wadkin with a stock head would approach the finish the Makita gives? I would love to trade up to a heavier machine, but am not willing to give much on surface quality. I can test it under power, though the machine is not currently in use and the knives may be dull. Just wondering whether it is worth a drive to check it out.

  2. #2
    The Bursgreen UO line of planners that did come in Over unders (UO/S) is really not a Wadkin machine but a Sagar bursgreen re tagged wadkin Bursgreen and in some cases only Bursgreen is seen on the name casting (1950 to 1956) after 1956 these machines were Wadkin Bursgreen as Wadkin took over John Sagar of England and with a swipe of a pen got the innovative firm of Bursgreen than a Sagar development Co. The machine tag contains the date(year) of manufacture if you have a pix i could tell you its date of birth.

    Its not fair to the Makita to rate the two machines as planers but i will address your question on Knife cuts per inch. The Japaneses planer runs a very small head 2.5" at 10400 RPM from a brush type motor(router motor ) that is limited to about 3HP peek with a feed rate of about 20 feet a minute , so does and will have more knife marks per inch than the UO/3. All this translates to a better finish kind of with all things being equal. That same planer does not have a chip breaker or pressure bar in front or behind the head but uses neoprene rollers front and back nearer the small head so it can run shorter lengths than the UO/3 because the feed rollers are closer together. whats great about Neoprene in feed rollers is if the knifes are nicked then the wood can be run through again off set of the nicks so that the portion of unnicked knifes remove the raised nicks and no mark are left on the finish like an all steel serrated in feed roller would leave. It does all this in light cutting and so is painfully slow at taking wood down because its a finish machine . The cuts have to be light and the knifes work two times as hard and get more mileage because more passes are needed to get the work down to size so they dull quicker too. they are a laminated knife tipped in a high grade HSS to over come this and the price to passed down to the user. Its going to be hard to bet the finish off the Japaneses head that i might add is a Square head with plates so the rake angle of the knife is sharper than that of the slotted gib plate heads most common to many here.

    I would give you a run down on what is Better about the UO/3 beyond the 9" depth of cut so uncommon on American machines if your interested . Oh BTW i have a few Bursgreen jointers with the skewed knife heads an option on the UO/3.
    Last edited by jack forsberg; 11-27-2014 at 12:14 PM.
    jack
    English machines

  3. #3
    Thanks, Jack. I was hoping you would respond as the resident Wadkin expert here. I don't have a good photo of the nameplate. I guess the answer to my question of comparable finish is no.

    I am well aware of the weakness of the Makita, and the difference in build quality and general stoutness between it and a heavy duty machine like the Wadkin. In fact, I have always been amazed at how well the Makita maintains dimensions and minimizes snipe even with fairly heavy workpieces despite its primitive hold-down mechanism. Still, I would rather stick with slow and fine rather than switch to fast and coarse for the work I am doing. Most of the time anyway.

    In terms of knife wear, I have a set of carbide knives that came with my used machine, and though they don't take quite as sharp an edge, they give a good result for quite a long time as long as only clean material goes through.

    At work, we run a 20" SCMI with onboard grinder which when tuned up does as good a job as the Makita, though not quite up to the segmented head machines I have used. So I know there are heavy planers capable of an equal finish. Guess I will keep looking.

  4. #4
    Quote Originally Posted by Kevin Jenness View Post
    Thanks, I would rather stick with slow and fine rather than switch to fast and coarse for the work I am doing.

    Not that i don't post from time to time here i would like to clear up that i am not the resident wadkin guy here. My home is the Canadian woodworking forum in the vintage tools forum where you will find the largest group of English machine experts hanging out.

    I never said the UO was a coarse machine and is capable of as good a finish as scm or the Makita all things being equal. Even the Japaneses like I don't think a planner is a finishing machine because no mater how many knifes marks per inch or lines from a helical head its not a wood finish that is ready for spray finish.

    If you ever seen the finish off a skewed knife head you would have no desire for a helical.


    planers are not finishing machines that why most shops have a wide belt sander. or
    that's why they have the super surface's in japan , but there not planers.

    Last edited by jack forsberg; 11-27-2014 at 2:41 PM.
    jack
    English machines

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Central WI
    Posts
    5,666
    It is also about more than cuts per inch. Diameter of head, angle of cut into the board, chipbreakers and pressure bars accurately located with easy to adjust rollers and hold downs. As the years have gone by and the need to value engineer have increased, design compromises or at the least, adjustment compromises, have been made that make the insert head more important than on older machines. Doesn't make the new ones give a better finish but they are more forgiving of those who can't make the million adjustments that are needed to get a close to finish surface on an older slower machine. You need to look at a diagram of the design of both to make the call. Dave

  6. #6
    Yes,you are right about planers not being intended for final surface. But who has not been in assorted commercial buildings including universities and not seen thousands of lineal feet of s4s trim and noticed it was not sanded? And some looked good enough that you did not notice it. I remember when most shops did not have wide belt sanders but did make money. Tear out makes a lot of
    difference ,without it many of those jobs can be sold unsanded. If the Wadkin has a high grade of steel for knives I think the finish will be at least as good as the other planer.

  7. #7
    the UO/S is still a very prized machine in the UK and often gets its $5000 price. Itsthe over under model to UO/1 the UO/2 and the UO/3 that are 12" 16" 24" respectively. these are production panel planers that are 3 speed but with a belt change under the cover can change the range to as fast a 100 feet per min feed rates. power tables and a special knife setting jig as the pressure bars and rollers are factory set and maintain the settings of finish planing not coarse planning. Heads are 4.5"



    Last edited by jack forsberg; 11-27-2014 at 6:32 PM.
    jack
    English machines

  8. #8
    Jack, I guess I misunderstood you when you said," All this translates to a better finish kind of with all things being equal." and " Its going to be hard to bet the finish off the Japaneses head". Perhaps it is worth taking a 90 minute ride to check out the Wadkin, though I don't expect miracles from a 50 year old machine that has not been used recently. I will assess it as such. Thanks for the replies.

  9. #9
    The seller tells me the nameplate says "UO/3 61167". The casting bears the legend Wadkin Bursgreen. At second look at the photos, the gearbox appears to be two speed. The machine looks much like the UO/S in the photos here but for the jointer tables and immaculate finish. I will go to check it out soon.

  10. #10
    1961 birth date. Here is the manual for you to check over. Yes my bad 2 speed feed drive.
    http://www.rjmachinery.co.uk/manuals...wadkin/UOS.pdf

    one thing to check is if it has the special order head for molding knifes.
    head uo.JPG

    I have a Wadkin head like this here it is in action

    Last edited by jack forsberg; 11-28-2014 at 10:24 AM.
    jack
    English machines

  11. #11
    I went to see the machine today. It sat next to an old straghtline ripsaw and a newer Pinheiro moulder in a sawmill. Turned out to be a 2 knife head and I believe 410 volts on the nameplate. It gave a surprisingly chipout free result on a piece of curly maple despite the bed rollers resisting lowering to less than 1/32" above the table, and not perfectly sharp knives. It clearly has seen heavy use but runs well. I am undecided, will see about a transformer's cost I guess. Can the motor be swapped out for a 220volt unit, or is the frame such an odd size as to make that impractical?

  12. #12
    If you could swap out the motor, you'd probably be looking into replacing or make modifications to the motor controls as well.

  13. #13
    Yep, Kevin. Two knife head with high quality knives can leave a better finish than a four knife head full of no quality.

Posting Permissions

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