Jointer planes-size, chip breaker or not?

[Mike Holbrook]

I have been running a thread on "shooting" edges with a shooting plane. I got several responses suggesting that a jointer plane might be the correct tool for "jointing edges". This raises a question in my head regarding which jointer.

Certainly these pages have been buzzing for some time now regarding the specific ways chip breakers can prevent tear out. The other emerging news seems to be that with a chip breaker one may be able to use a blade at a lesser angle, providing an even smoother surface. I imagine these "truths" hold true for jointing edges as well as working surfaces. Certainly many of us have LA/BU planes without chip breakers and wooden planes with thick BD blades, which may be fine for softer hard woods and reasonable grain.

The other factor I wonder about is the physical dimensions and blade angles of planes used for jointing. In the other thread I ran some people even copped to using block planes for shooting small pieces. Certainly the little planes get used frequently to relieve edges...So my question becomes how long and wide does a jointer need to be? To answer my own question I suspect the answer relates to specific work. Typically shorter planes for shorter boards. It is fairly easy to figure out that a 26" jointer might not be necessary to joint a 1 foot board. To over simplify, the plane body, via it's length, is suppose to ride over valleys removing humps until the board becomes level, but how wide apart might those humps be?

I know some posters here do not feel the need to own a #6 or #5 1/2. Some of those who like the #6 or #5 1/2 do not care for the "other" 1/2 size different plane. Some seem happy doing most of their jointing with a #5 1/2 or #6 and may not own a #7 or #8. Then there are some who make monster 26" or more wood planes for jointing.

I wonder if, starting on the small end, a # 5 1/2 might actually work fine for joining boards up to 24" maybe 36". Those who may want to prepare the entire edge of an 8' board and then cross cut out needed pieces might want a longer plane. I think we may have a poster on these pages who uses a 5 1/2 for most of his work. I am guessing many boards were jointed with a #6,#5 1/2, #5, #5 1/4....back in the day. Regarding the chip breaker and blade angle I am wondering whether the edge of a board might be more or less in need of a chip breaker and higher/lower blade angle?

Now that we have a plane maker who will make frogs for BD planes at custom angles, might this option offer some interesting new approaches to preparing boards for joining as well as for surfacing?

[Kees Heiden]

I have a choice. An antique Stanley #7, setup with a rather straight edge, minimal amount of camber. Of course equiped with a chipbreaker that I definitely use when neccessary. I also just made a 27" wooden jointer with an old 2 1/2" wide double iron. This one happens to have slightly more camber, I am still experimenting if that is helpfull for me or not. They are really both equally usefull, but I like wooden planes a lot.

So, in both cases a bevel down plane with a capiron. I wouldn't want something else, and I don't see the need to spend several hundreds of euro's for a bevel up variant.

[Bill White]

I use a #7 because of the weight. Seems to give me an easier follow through. My 5 1/2 has a cambered iron. Not too cool for shooting, and the irons are somewhat hard to find, so a replacement iron is not available.
Bill

[Brian Holcombe]

Jointing large work in a vise, I prefer the double iron try plane. Jointing thin work affixed to my bench top I use a 7 plane followed by a 4 plane, both are BD with chip breakers.

[Mike Holbrook]

Thanks for your thoughts Kees,

I am sort of the opposite of you in terms of planes. My main jointer is a BU. My wood jointer is a whole inch shorter than yours. Also my wood jointer is built for 2" single irons. I have Stanley #6 & # 5 1/2 planes.

I work on chair/table legs a good deal lately. They are typically 24"-32"- 2x2" oak which I plane into tapered squares then octagons. There is a tendency to loose track of edges vs surfaces. So far I have done the work without guides, by eye. I do not have a lathe and have no plans to buy one, at least until I sell a house, build a new one...Using a #7 size jointer for that work seems over kill to me. I use #5, 5 1/2 & 6 for these. A larger plane will wear a person down, removing that much wood. More of the work I have planned is boards under 36". If I get around to building a bench top, table top, dresser top....I am guessing this is where the long jointers will be nice to have.

The other thing about "jointer' style planes that gets me thinking relates to whether I plan to use the plane more like an old style fore plane, for removing larger shavings, or whether I plan to use it more as a finishing type plane, to produce final surfaces. My Stanley planes are set up more for rough/medium shavings. At the moment my BU plane is the one set up more for fine shavings. Jointers, especially the shorter incarnations, seem to work at two extremes in terms of rough vs fine work. One can sort of see why some people do not use these medium length planes at all and some use them much of the time.

Kees I am interested in hearing more about your experiments with camber on these planes.

[Jim Koepke]

The size of the plane is relative to the size of the piece to be worked.

A #6 is more common than a #5-1/2. It is also usually less expen$ive on the secondhand market. For many things either would be fine planes for jointing. For some of my smaller work a #3 has been used for edge jointing.

My preference is for a bevel down plane with a chip breaker for edge jointing.

As always, YMMV!!!.jpg

jtk

[Derek Cohen]

The other factor I wonder about is the physical dimensions and blade angles of planes used for jointing. In the other thread I ran some people even copped to using block planes for shooting small pieces. Certainly the little planes get used frequently to relieve edges...So my question becomes how long and wide does a jointer need to be? To answer my own question I suspect the answer relates to specific work. Typically shorter planes for shorter boards. It is fairly easy to figure out that a 26" jointer might not be necessary to joint a 1 foot board. To over simplify, the plane body, via it's length, is suppose to ride over valleys removing humps until the board becomes level, but how wide apart might those humps be?

I know some posters here do not feel the need to own a #6 or #5 1/2. Some of those who like the #6 or #5 1/2 do not care for the "other" 1/2 size different plane. Some seem happy doing most of their jointing with a #5 1/2 or #6 and may not own a #7 or #8. Then there are some who make monster 26" or more wood planes for jointing.

Mike, if you are jointing two thin edges, and doing this on your bench top, then you need a long plane, such as the LV Custom #7 I showed in the previous thread. It is only when you use a long shooting board that you can use a short plane to joint a long board.

For most users, there is little difference when shooting side edges with a BD/chipbreaker or a high angle BU plane. The main advantage of a chipbreaker is on face grain, where the surface is seen. On the other hand, I use wood with much reversing grain, and I like the reassurance that the chipbreaker offers, that is, planing into the grain without fear of tearout.

As for jointing in the vise .... I think that issue of woodies vs metal planes is really a personal preference for amateurs. There is too little use in the week in the shop to claim advantages of one over the other. My personal preference is a plane with a lower centre of effort. I have designed and built, and purchased, woodies along these lines. Nevertheless, I flip back-and-forth with metal planes, and probably use them more. The high-sided woodies feel too detached (this is my experience).

Regards from Perth

Derek

[Mike Holbrook]

Thanks for all the thoughts,

As always the YMMV! comment from Jim above is very relevant. I started out thinking I wanted to build cabinets. Now I am more interested in furniture, with a developing interest in green wood. Tool preferences for these types of work are certainly different.

The work I have done recently often entails removing lots of stock, which is about the opposite of what I originally thought I might be doing making cabinets using wood dimensioned, for the work, on at least two sides. Planing a 2x2" or a split from a oak log down into a tapered octagonal leg may be more intense/longer work than what the average person is considering doing regularly? For this type of work, weight & length becomes not just an ally but a physical challenge that needs to be considered.... I am thinking 5-5 1/2 size planes with maybe a 5 1/4 for when I get whipped out.

I have several BU Veritas planes which I bought because of my preference for the low heavy feel Derek mentions above. I still like that kind of plane but if one figures doing hundreds of strokes vs ten or twenty things change. I see more rough and green wood in my future and I am not getting any younger.

[Patrick Chase]

My personal rule of thumb for jointing is to choose a plane that's at least half the length of the workpiece. Obviously there are cases where you can't do that, but on the whole it works for me. I routinely joint smaller work with a #5 or #6, but I also have a #7 and a #8 for the big stuff.

w.r.t. the BU/BD/cap-iron question Derek hit the nail on the head. and this is something I tried to raise in the other thread as well: Jointed surfaces are generally not cosmetic. When we joint edges we usually do it as a preparation for glue-up. When we joint faces we usually smooth afterwards. If you use a high-bevel blade to avoid tearout then the resulting loss of "glassiness" won't be a problem in either case. Even in the case of jointing a face a single pass with a well-tuned and tightly set BD smoother will generally get the surface up to snuff (note that this is emphatically not the case if you use a low-bevel blade in your BU jointer and get tearout as a result).

With all of that said, I subjectively prefer to joint using BD planes and relatively close-set cap irons. I think that I could get equal final results (after glueing/smoothing/etc) with a BU jointer and appropriately beveled blades, but I subjectively perceive that as a somewhat "messy" solution. Other people will have different preferences.

IMO the final planing pass (typically smoothing) is where you get the big payoff from "cap iron magic".

The surface quality tradeoff isn't new BTW. If you go back and re-read what David wrote years ago or at Derek's review of the Veritas custom planes you'll see it spelled out pretty clearly (at least that's how I interpreted both at the time).

[Patrick Chase]

I have several BU Veritas planes which I bought because of my preference for the low heavy feel Derek mentions above. I still like that kind of plane but if one figures doing hundreds of strokes vs ten or twenty things change. I see more rough and green wood in my future and I am not getting any younger.

The Veritas BU jointer is a great plane and will get the job done with appropriately beveled blades. If you like the feel then there's no reason to replace it with a BD plane, unless you're one of those crazies that smooth with your jointers...

[Tony Zaffuto]

The Veritas BU jointer is a great plane and will get the job done with appropriately beveled blades. If you like the feel then there's no reason to replace it with a BD plane, unless you're one of those crazies that smooth with your jointers...

As a hybrid woodworker, I would also endorse this as an excellent means of getting a job done. One of my most used planes is my LN BU #7 (or is it a 7-1/2??). I do have a #7 Bedrock and #7 Bailey, but my subconscious seems to guide my hands to the LN virtually every time.

[Kees Heiden]

My wooden jointer is very fresh, but I have some experience with vintage wooden jointers too. I am doing carpentry work at the moment, but it is fun to try to get an entrance door really straight and square, or on the side of the lock of the door to introduce a definite chamfer of a few degrees, so the door can actually open. With the camber on the edge this is laughably easy. Shift the plane to the high side and the camber takes care of removing stock where it needs to be removed.

Thick things like entry doors are rather easy to joint. The thickness makes for a stable surface. Just plant the plane securely on the wood and do what needs to be done. Balancing on narrower boards is more difficult.

A long plane is helpfull (as long as it has a straight sole). It doesn't matter to me if it is a little too long. Jointing is usually something I do once in a while for short periods, so I don't mind if the plane is a little heavy. For flattening large pannels, a smaller plane is better, like a tryplane. I do have a 21" wooden try that is lighter then my Stanley #7. But the #7 isn't too bad, weight wise.

I have no experience with bevel up planes, so can't comment about them. Being happy with the BD's, I have no urge to try them.

[steven c newman]

Last project I just finished working on....
top.jpg
had a panel that needed the edges jointed. The plane sitting there did the work
Mohawk-Shelburne # 900/Millers Falls No. 90. Panel was a glue up, to make a lid for a small box.
Kind of handy, since I also cleaned up the glue joint with the same plane. No camber, chipbreaker is 2mm back from the edge.
I match the size of the plane to the work being done. There are a few Stanley No.7c, a Stanley No.6c, a stanley no.5-1/2 a few #5s and a 3 5-1/4. There is a Stanley No.31 as well as an Ohio Tool/ Auburn 22" long Try plane. All about what size the job is. The only bevel ups I have are block planes, low angle and standard.

[Robert Engel]

I wonder if, starting on the small end, a # 5 1/2 might actually work fine for joining boards up to 24" maybe 36".

Short answer, no, it will not be satisfactory.

In my shop, the #6 is actually the most frequently used plane. It is capable of jointing boards up to 24" after that I use a jointer plane.
It is my preferred plane for truing the faces of boards.

As for jointing a long board, then cutting, I would cut boards to length first, then joint.
IMO, jointing an 8' board will take more time than jointing 3 or 4 shorter lengths.

[Prashun Patel]

The best (glib) answer is the one that feels best in your hands so you'll be inclined to practice.

I think a #7ish plane is a good investment if you have the forearms for it, because it does more of the guesswork for you.

I own a wood try plane, bevel up jointer, and Bailey BD #7 jointer with a hock blade.

They all work fine. I don't believe there is anything practically better about BU vs BD; by far, the biggest variable is the quality of your sharpening.