Originally Posted by Stanley Covington
the only way that that is going to work is if you camber the sole of the plane too. that is called a gutter plane, and it won't be better than a jack plane for gross material removal in flattening .
Member
the only way that that is going to work is if you camber the sole of the plane too. that is called a gutter plane, and it won't be better than a jack plane for gross material removal in flattening .
Guest
I shaped a cap iron years ago to serve as a pattern for grinding the iron and to match the edge. It's only about a sixteenth of an inch from the dead center of the iron out to the edges - about the amount of 'camber' recommended in several old woodworking manuals for one's jack plane. It wasn't until I read this thread and the other one that somebody linked, that I realized what I had done all those years ago (has to have been at least 20 years) hadn't been working all this time. I rather like the set up. I think it does produce less tear out, though I've always been one not to produce a pock-marked minefield for my other planes to attempt to clean up all in the context of hitting some desired thickness of whatever board or panel I'm planing.
I don't have a specific recollection of doing this causing any problems with the fit of the cap iron to the back of the iron, though I'm guessing I worked the flat after grinding the curve but I simply don't remember. It all fits now; has for years. Maybe a little woodworking elf took care of it for me.
I'm of the opinion that the cap iron works best in conjunction with an appropriate mouth opening for the task. My jack plane doesn't have anything close to a wide-open mouth. I can't physically take a shaving thick enough in any configuration to require a wide-open mouth. Some of you may be able to, but I doubt for an extended period of time. I like the amount of material my jack can remove in one pass. I feel in control and not like I'm trying to hold back a rabid beaver. In taking 4/4 rough stock down to 7/8s or 3/4 finished there isn't really an overriding need to gratuitously hog off material and certainly not if doing so requires one to stop well short because of all the damage and tear out. The last thing I want to find myself doing is having to remove a sixteenth of an inch with a dinky smoothing plane to get below damage because I jacked the wood half to death and left a trail of devastation in an effort to be "fast." I did that once. I learned from it. That's not smart woodworking in my opinion. Trying to be "fast" has made for a lot of long days in my shop.
Last edited by Charles Guest; 12-09-2016 at 2:13 PM.
Contributor
Everyone has a preference for how much "work" they want to do. I haven't a time clock in the shop, and don't mind a little extra time doing something,,
scrubber jack.jpg
When I have a panel that needs planed down flat, a cambered jack can do the job in about the time it takes to type this post...followed by a "try plane"
fore plane.jpg
To get all the "high" spots down. Smooth? No, but flat enough that I can mark out a top's edges, and cut it to shape..
cut out top.jpg
And THEN I can work on getting things smooth..
IMAG0009.jpg
But,,,I tend to use a size of plane based on the size of the work. I can come back, and fine tune the smoothiness with a "dinky" smooth plane, if needed..
top, without glare.jpg
Quite a change from what was resawn down from 8/4 stock...
add a fourth.jpg
Guest
My use of the word "dinky" shouldn't be construed negatively. I love 'em, just not for removing bulk and/or damage that I never should have inflicted in the first place.
Last edited by Charles Guest; 12-09-2016 at 2:09 PM.
Contributor
I have witnessed this in many work places and many types of work. Working fast is not really working efficiently nor is it a guarantee of quality or getting a job done right.Trying to be "fast" has made for a lot of long days in my shop.
jtk
"A pessimist sees the difficulty in every opportunity; an optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty."
- Sir Winston Churchill (1874-1965)
Member
The kind of work you describe Charles, is what I usually do with my tryplane, a 23" long wooden plane with mild camber and straight capiron. The jackplane is for the rough stuff I seem to end up with usually. Badly twisted and cupped and way too thick. For small stuff I often do all the work with one plane, a coffin smoother or a Stanley #4. Maybe I should learn to wield an axe.
[OP]
Member
So back to the OP's original question. I am trying to figure out the best plane set ups for removing 1/4-1 inch of wood from 1x1" and 2x2" stock up to 30" long. I am working on raised panels made from glued up 1x1" lumber SYP and 2x2 red oak for legs.
My experience with this work so far suggests that I might not need as much camber as I started out thinking I would. The camber on my # 5 1/2 Custom Veritas plane currently is more like 1/16" or less ( on a 2 3/8" wide blade) at the highest point. Like others are mentioning I am torn between whether to try and use a much more cambered plane and then have to work the ridges out and smooth the remaining surface or use a less cambered plane and just live with the fact that it isn't removing as much wood as fast? Fast is a tricky term. I am not concerned that I might have to spend a few more say up to 15-20 minuets more, but hours more...?
I plan to do more chair legs and raised panels so I am trying to optimize the planes I plan to use for this specific work. I am choosing these two example because I also think they are representative of other work I plan to do.
Guest
A sixteenth to a fat sixteenth of curve is all you need on a standard No. 5. If you use a plane with a wider iron then go up to an eighth.
Contributor
Use a hatchet and follow that up with a jack plane.
Bumbling forward into the unknown.
[OP]
Member
Charles I think we are getting down to realities here. I have to ask if you got the camber size you suggest for the typically 2" blade on a #5 vs the 2 2/8" blade on my #5 1/2 backwards? I think you would want less camber on the wider blade, as the wider blade takes off a wider shaving and will be harder to push.
I like the wider blade of the #5 1/2 for making raised panels as the surface being planed ends up being close to 1 3/4" wide. It seems to allow me to take a little more off either side as the raised edge emerges. Then the question returns back to whether on a 2 3/8" blade with, maybe we call it a mediocre camber, will the CB: help, make things worse, not actually do anything even if I have it optimally placed....?
Contributor
None of my 2-3/8" wide irons have any camber ( maybe right at the corners) I have three 2" wide irons for my three jack planes.....8" radius, a very slight camber, and a corners only.....
I have no camber on the Junior jack ( M-F No.11 ) as I use it a lot for both jointing small stuff, and as a long smoother.
Actually, I do have a "Scrub-Jack" with a more deeper bite from the camber. So, that gives me 4 in the #5 size planes. Depending on how fast and rough I want to go, I can pick the plane for the job. Already set up and ready to go.
I have had a lot of rough stock come through the shop. And more than a few panel glue ups that needed scrubbed to flat. then there have been a few where the saw marks were the only things needed to be removed. Like when I resaw stock down.
A Stanley #40 needed no chipbreaker.......nor does my Windsor #33 scrub plane.
Guest
More camber on the wider blade... mass of plane makes the effort about equal IMO. Could be just a 'feel' thing though.
Contributor
When 1/4" or more stock needs to be removed my bandsaw gets to do the work. On smaller stock a handsaw can do it with a lot less work than using a plane.
1" is a lot to knock down with a hand plane.
jtk
"A pessimist sees the difficulty in every opportunity; an optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty."
- Sir Winston Churchill (1874-1965)
Contributor
Or a drawknife and then a jack.
[OP]
Member
Brian, I guess you are mentioning the axe for chair legs? Axe might work as the drawknives and spokeshaves have a problem with hard dry wood. May need to work on my axe skills.
Steve I am a little confused with the statements you make above as the picture of the camber you showed earlier in the thread looks to be more than the 7-8" radius I have on my Stanley 5 1/4 with a smaller blade.
Jim I was thinking maybe as much as 1" removed from a 2/2" piece of stock to make a tapered octagonal chair leg, still a bunch of wood to remove but not like taking a 2x2 down to a 1x2. I have used a bandsaw to remove larger amounts of wood for chair seats and legs, especially if there are more than a couple to do. I have been doing a few chair legs and panels by hand with planes to get better at removing wood faster and to toughen the skin on my hands up after some allergy issues with my skin. Still playing around with which methods work best for me. At the moment my bandsaw is at our new home and I am working on projects at the old home.
Last edited by Mike Holbrook; 12-10-2016 at 11:32 PM.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote