The Veritas Custom Planes - more than a review

[Derek Cohen]

One thing lead to another, and I wrote a series of articles ... four in all.


It just seemed to flow in that direction.


It began with the idea that if one could design a plane of their dream, what what they include? Lee Valley recently released the Custom Bench Plane concept, and I have a jointer and a smoother. I also have a bunch of parts ... and together they offer the opportunity to explore different combinations. And then compare these with BU equivalents and Stanley equivalents ........


You get the message. It became bigger than Ben Hur.


I'd like the articles to be a springboard for discussion here. Some of it is old stuff, but there is also new stuff. I can add, modify, include what is written to the articles.


1. Introduction: http://www.inthewoodshop.com/ToolRev...omPlanes1.html


2. Designing a Plane: tips on choosing and tuning: http://www.inthewoodshop.com/ToolRev...omPlanes2.html


3. Designing a Plane: Knobs and Handles - or how we really use a plane! : http://www.inthewoodshop.com/ToolRev...omPlanes3.html


4. To Chipbreak or Not to Chipbreak: frog angle choice : http://www.inthewoodshop.com/ToolRev...omPlanes4.html


Happy New Year and ...


Regards from Perth


Derek

[Will Boulware]

In a word, WOW! Thanks for taking the time to answer (and bring up) so many questions!

[Jeff Ranck]

Derek:

Well done (yet) again! I read all four and I can't imagine the amount of actual "work" it took to put these together. I found the articles very interesting and will definitely be using the info in there if (when?) I actually can purchase one of these. I certainly want one, even if I don't necessarily need one.

I found it interesting that after reading your section on handles and how folks actually push a plane, I could recognize the way that I use my old stanley #5, which I have set up as a coarse plane with a 8" or so camber on the iron. I hadn't noticed before, but I do tend to push with the heal of my hand and the top of my hand is basically unsupported. My forearm is parallel with the work and I'm definitely not pushing "down" toward the mouth of the plane. My first plane was a LV bevel up jack, so that may have influenced how I "learned" to hold and push a plane.

I don't have the range of planes you have, but I do find I prefer the mushroom front knob of my BU jack and BU jointer over the other knob types on my Stanley #5 and LV BD smoother (old style).

Again, well done!

[Bill White]

Excellent study and documentation. Wish we had more well thought efforts such as yours.
Bill

[Jim Koepke]

Thanks for all the work Derek.

Maybe I will win the lottery and then get a hankering for some new planes.

jtk

[Pat Barry]

Your concept of Center of Effort has been discussed previously here in at least one other thread "The other advantage to a BU plane is that it has a low centre of effort. The force vector focuses the energy efficiently. I have long argued that, angle-for-angle, a BU plane require less effort to push and offer more feedback than a BD plane with a high centre of effort. "
This is an unfamiliar term but it seems what you are saying is that the center of mass of a BU plane is apparently lower than for a BD plane with the same angle. Perhaps this has to do with the handle and the way the tool is gripped and pushed or maybe it has do to with the apparent tendency of the blade to pull the plane into the wood. If this (latter) is the case, then I now see that the chipbreaker being set close to the cutting edge as advocated for a BD plane actually causes the user to have to exert more downforce to push the plane down as opposed to the BU plane being unrestricted by a cap iron, therefore less restricted and requiring a lower user downforce. This reduced user supplied downforce is interpreted by the user as what you term the lower center of effort. Thoughts? Does this make sense?

[Shawn Pixley]

Thanks Derek!

Insightful as always. I found especially interesting the handle analysis. The taller but curved prototype that you made of the Stanley version, did you keep it and use it? I am tempted to build one as I like the curve in the handle but after a long planing session find the heel of my palm at the pinky side is sore (maybe bruised if I was flattening a large slab).

[Reinis Kanders]

Great articles! Really resonated for me. I am not an experienced woodworker, but do have a lot of planes and have used them a lot for a couple of years. I am also an engineer so I do try to quantify my feelings

I also found that for the new custom smoother I prefer the same handle combos that you chose. I ordered both types, and strongly favor mushroom for front and Veritas style tote for the back.
BTW they seem to not color match their new handles so my custom plane is now custom ugly

One thing that irks me about the custom planes is that area around the plane's mouth is not flat instead it has quite a curve to accommodate adjustment screw. On Stanley planes I like to put my thumb in that area when edge jointing.

Thanks again for the good read.

[Jim Koepke]

Thoughts? Does this make sense?

Yes Pat it does.

The chip breaker is pushing back on the shaving as it is being formed. It helps prevent tear out, but it takes a little more energy from the equation.

it has do to with the apparent tendency of the blade to pull the plane into the wood.

To me this tendency seems to lift the wood ahead of the blade if the bevel is at a low angle. In some woods it seems my BD planes can get a better surface than my BU planes.

jtk

[Richard Line]

Thanks for these articles. They answered a number of questions, including several I hadn't got around to asking myself. A thought did come to me about using the LV standard handle and downward pressure (I have the LV bu jointer and bu smoother). Particularly with the jointer, I am now wondering if we don't also apply downward pressure through the side of the heal of our hand as it 'rests' on the bottom of the plane; I shouldn't think this would be a lot of pressure.

Also thanks for including the link to cambering bu blades. I had seen this before I got my bu planes and had forgotten about it. Now, I will need to use this approach. Thanks again.

[Jeff Ranck]

Thanks Derek!

The taller but curved prototype that you made of the Stanley version, did you keep it and use it? I am tempted to build one as I like the curve in the handle but after a long planing session find the heel of my palm at the pinky side is sore (maybe bruised if I was flattening a large slab).

oooh yes. A pattern!

[Malcolm Schweizer]

Thank you for sharing your usual thorough review. I found myself wanting to slap Christopher Schwarz and say, "Dude- get a taller bench. It hurts to look at you in that position."

[David B. Morris]

Derek, I have mined your site for much advice as I have re-started my woodworking education; your pages on M&T are the best I've seen. This treatise on the LV custom planes and planes in general was a revelation in many ways. The next time I'm in the shop I'll have your findings about hand-tote geometry in mind.

[Derek Cohen]

Thanks Derek!

Insightful as always. I found especially interesting the handle analysis. The taller but curved prototype that you made of the Stanley version, did you keep it and use it? I am tempted to build one as I like the curve in the handle but after a long planing session find the heel of my palm at the pinky side is sore (maybe bruised if I was flattening a large slab).

Thanks Shawn.

The handle on the #604 is going to remain! It is a significant improvement in control, comfort and power.

One of the design features of this handle I did not mention (there were already too many items going into the article) is the area where the pinky rests. If you compare mine with the Veritas, you will note (below) that this area is removed. The handle is a three-finger grip (compared to the four-finger grip of the Veritas), and I wanted to make it feel less "crowded".



The ergonomics especially become apparent as the blade begins to dull and you push harder. Observe this for yourself.

Regards from Perth

Derek

[Derek Cohen]

.... Particularly with the jointer, I am now wondering if we don't also apply downward pressure through the side of the heal of our hand as it 'rests' on the bottom of the plane; I shouldn't think this would be a lot of pressure. ...

Hi Richard

I cannot imagine the benefit of both downforce and forward thrust being exerted from the handle side of the plane. The only time I expect to exert downforce at the handle end is when we reach the end of a board. Otherwise it strikes me as wasted energy.

My perception (open to discussion, so do to take this as the only view) is that downforce is only meaningful at the mouth of the plane, where there is benefit in holding down wood fibres as they are cut. My perception is that this is done via downforce on the toe (above the mouth).

This is the reason I asked Mateo about the radical forward lean of his handles, particularly with such a heavy plane. I was not being critical, just curious. His threads are: http://www.sawmillcreek.org/showthre...fill-smoothers and http://www.sawmillcreek.org/showthre...fill-completed

Regards from Perth

Derek