Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 16 to 30 of 30

Thread: Show me your wooden jacks

  1. #16
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Perth, Australia
    Posts
    9,469
    Nicholas, I do not see a need for a chipbreaker with a jack using a deep camber.

    One does not plane with the grain when planing panels, so a suggestion of grain type for plane use is irrelevant. Planing here takes place diagonally or across the grain. If planing with the grain, I would use a fore plane, such as a #6, which has more camber than a smoother, but much less than a jack. A double iron would be useful here.

    In the areas for a jack, a single iron suffices.

    Regards from Perth

    Derek
    Last edited by Derek Cohen; 01-16-2017 at 2:10 AM.

  2. #17
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Lubbock, Tx
    Posts
    1,490
    Quote Originally Posted by Stewie Simpson View Post
    Tony; that would depend on the type of grain your normally working with. If its straight grained timber, controlling depth of tear-out is not as big an issue.
    The wonderful thing about North America is lots of straight grained hardwoods about perfect for handtools. I feel sorry for you Australians when I read about the sandstone columns y'all call trees; of course if I relied on trees native to Lubbock I'd be weaving grass baskets.

    That said, don't worry too much about grain with a fore type plane as I traverse across the grain with it.

  3. #18
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    2,534
    All good Tony; sounds like you've covered the initial stage of using a jack/fore plane. When you work out why Jack Planes were historically also offered in double irons as well, you should be able to work out the next direction of planing.

    Stewie;
    Last edited by Stewie Simpson; 01-16-2017 at 12:06 AM.

  4. #19
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    2,534
    Tony; you might find the following something to think about. Listen carefully to why its called a Jack Plane.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=65sVCcvewB0

    All the best with your wooden plane build. If you decide to go ahead with the traditional construction, you're in for a steep learning curve.

    Stewie;
    Last edited by Stewie Simpson; 01-16-2017 at 3:30 AM.

  5. #20
    Quote Originally Posted by Derek Cohen View Post
    Hi Kees

    I am curious how you use a double iron in a jack plane, if the blade is cambered as I mentioned above?

    The jack pictured above is one I built several years ago, before we began using double irons, and it continues to do duty. I also have a #605 set up as a jack, and here the chipbreaker is pulled back. In other words, it may as well be a single iron plane. So, unless the plane does double duty with a straight blade, why is it important to use a double iron specially in a jack plane?

    Regards from Perth

    Derek
    I thought this was just a show off thread, not a discuss the double iron thread

    But to answer your question, I don't think the capiron does anything in these deply cambered planes to reduce tearout. But there is more to a double iron then just that. It is a springy part in the clamping arrangement and seems to tighten down the works considerably. When I adjust the plane it needs a solid wack with the hammer. It now behaves the same way under the hammer as my other wooden planes, which makes it somehow easier to go from one plane to the next.

    BTW, I use the jack plane just as much or even more often with the grain then across. On anything not really wide, going across the grain makes things more difficult.

    And I only need such a deeply cambered jack only when I really need it, when a lot needs to be removed. When only shallow cuts are neccessary I go straight to the tryplane.

  6. #21
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Perth, Australia
    Posts
    9,469
    Hi Kees

    Interesting idea about the spring in the chipbreaker. I see this with a Stanley, but the ones for the woodies I have are pretty stout/stiff. Consequently, I wouldn't have considered that spring played a role there. But it makes sense.

    As a matter of interest, have you ever measured the radius on your jack blade? Any idea?

    Regards from Perth

    Derek

  7. #22
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Location
    Texas Hill Country
    Posts
    94
    Derek:

    is the brass mouth on your plane held in place with screws? Have a very old Jack that I would like to add something like that to it.....

    Thanks,
    Andy

    -- mos maiorum

  8. #23
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Perth, Australia
    Posts
    9,469
    Hi Andy

    With screws (filed flush) and epoxy ...



    The plane was an interesting experimental build (8 years ago), using a combination of solid cheeks and side laminations ...

    http://www.inthewoodshop.com/ShopMad...JackPlane.html

    Regards from Perth

    Derek

  9. #24
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Princeton, NJ
    Posts
    7,254
    Blog Entries
    7
    Quote Originally Posted by Derek Cohen View Post
    Nicholas, I do not see a need for a chipbreaker with a jack using a deep camber.

    One does not plane with the grain when planing panels, so a suggestion of grain type for plane use is irrelevant. Planing here takes place diagonally or across the grain. If planing with the grain, I would use a fore plane, such as a #6, which has more camber than a smoother, but much less than a jack. A double iron would be useful here.

    In the areas for a jack, a single iron suffices.

    Regards from Perth

    Derek
    This one often planes with the grain when planing panels and so I use a plane with a chip breaker.

    I'm with Kees in that I work with the grain using a jack plane almost as much as I work across the grain, if not more.
    Bumbling forward into the unknown.

  10. #25
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Perth, Australia
    Posts
    9,469
    The issue is, Brian, when using a jack with pronounced camber, the chipbreaker is pulled back out of the way. Is that correct?

    Regards from Perth

    Derek

  11. #26
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Princeton, NJ
    Posts
    7,254
    Blog Entries
    7
    It's set to a spot where it's functional against the chip, noted by the chip exiting up and not curling or curling lightly. That setting is further back than it would be for a finish plane or a try plane, but certainly not so far back that it isn't working the chip.
    Last edited by Brian Holcombe; 01-16-2017 at 9:06 AM.
    Bumbling forward into the unknown.

  12. #27
    Then I can certainly set the capiron a bit closer to the edge, it will overlap the corners then. I suppose it is one of those "skill" things again, being able to put it exactly where it helps, without putting it so close that you need to push way too hard.

    Derek, I forgot where I ended up with the camber. I was not happy with the 6" - 8" when I made the planes, but I forgot what they are now. A bit more then 10" for the longer plane is my guess and a little tighter with smaller plane.

  13. #28
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Perth, Australia
    Posts
    9,469
    This is why I have asked about the radius of the camber you use on your jack(s). There is no point in moving the chipbreaker closer on my #5 as it could not get close enough to make a difference. The radius is 10".

    I am not sure whether what I use as a jack, another will see as a scrub-like plane. And what you call a jack is closer to what I use as a fore plane.

    Regards from Perth

    Derek

  14. #29
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Princeton, NJ
    Posts
    7,254
    Blog Entries
    7
    I'm using a jack, not a fore plane. David Weaver made the plane based on historical examples.

    I dont measure the radius I just work the bevel until it does what I want it to do. It's significantly cambered.
    Bumbling forward into the unknown.

  15. #30
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    2,534
    The thought process behind how much camber is needed on the iron is an interesting topic. In my case, the most important consideration is taking full advantage of the irons width, so deciding before hand what the maximum depth of cut is likely to be with that iron will determine the amount of camber. Its likely the case, based on the diverse range of uses for a Jack Plane, that either 2 sets of irons, or 2 Jack Planes are preferable to have at your disposal. That in itself seems to fall within some historical context, given the fact that wooden Jack Planes were offered in both single and double iron formats. Of the 2, I know which one I would personally choose to apply less camber too.

    I am also not an advocate of encroaching the front edge of the cap iron into the cambered profile, but that determination is based on the thickness of the front edge, commonly found within earlier made cap irons.

    Stewie;
    Last edited by Stewie Simpson; 01-16-2017 at 8:11 PM.

Posting Permissions

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