Plane most improved with a premium blade

[Allen Jordan]

I have a WWII-era stanley 60-1/2 that I've tuned in every way I can and still tends to chatter a bit on the cut at full width. And the iron seems really soft compared to most I've used. Might be a candidate for replacement. Veritas makes some nice replacement irons.

[Patrick Chase]

I know some that would disagree with you, Patrick. They are woodworkers as well as planemakers.

Philip Marcou builds planes of the highest order (I have one), and his favourite steel for use is D2. He has said to me that it is all in the heat treatment.

Terry Gordon, of HNT Gordon, offers HSS as his premier blade. He would not do so if it compromised the performance of his planes.

A Kiwi and an Aussie, respectively :-).

I should have explicitly made an exception for highly abrasive woods. IMO if the wood is really nasty then that shifts the optimum towards really abrasion resistant high-alloy, high-carbide steels like D2 and HSS. PM-V11 should perform quite well, too.

[Warren Mickley]

I would consider a Sweetheart iron a "premium blade". This evening I planed interlocked jarrah, 100 strokes at .001 inches, then curly walnut 50 strokes at .0005 inches. After this I would not call it sharp, but the iron cut end grain pine very cleanly.

I tried a Marcou plane in 2009; it was pathetic.

[Skip Helms]

The PM blade arrived for the junior jack today. I honed the secondary bevel but will need to open the mouth of the plane a little. I was able to squeeze a tiny shaving between the front of the mouth and the blade but I can't get a read on the effectiveness until it is enlarged enough not to trap the waste. Cheers, sh

[Stewie Simpson]

I would consider a Sweetheart iron a "premium blade". This evening I planed interlocked jarrah, 100 strokes at .001 inches, then curly walnut 50 strokes at .0005 inches. After this I would not call it sharp, but the iron cut end grain pine very cleanly.

I tried a Marcou plane in 2009; it was pathetic.

Warren; I am also a worker of sometimes cantankerous Australian Timbers, and I just cannot understand this strong desire to abandon more traditional steel. Some of the modern tool manufacturers have really got their advertising and promotional mumbo jumbo down to a fine art. Enough said on my behalf.

regards Stewie;

[Skip Helms]

Stewie; I haven't made the study of this that many have, but I really haven't found a steel that is as "satisfying" as well-made high-carbon either. For hogging, the newer compositions have advantages but for that perfect cut, I still like O1 the best. Haven't tried 1095 but I might get a bar when I order some other stuff from McMaster Carr just to test it out. I understand it needs a special quench but maybe I can find a way around that.

Skip

[Derek Cohen]

For hogging, the newer compositions have advantages but for that perfect cut, I still like O1 the best.

Skip, as one who actually has used all the steels, and actually does build furniture with them (rather than collecting tools for decorating benches), I will reaffirm that sharp is sharp, and that "newer compositions" are not just for hogging, but also the finest surfaces.

Regards from Perth

Derek

[Stewie Simpson]

Stewie; I haven't made the study of this that many have, but I really haven't found a steel that is as "satisfying" as well-made high-carbon either. For hogging, the newer compositions have advantages but for that perfect cut, I still like O1 the best. Haven't tried 1095 but I might get a bar when I order some other stuff from McMaster Carr just to test it out. I understand it needs a special quench but maybe I can find a way around that.

Skip

Skip; we share similar thoughts on the attributes that 01 can offer the modern woodworker. I am not keen to venture further above that statement, as the numbers are against us on an open forum.

regards Stewie;

[Jim Koepke]

For me, some of yesterday was spent helping a new friend figure out why he was having trouble with some of his planes. One of the problems seemed to be increased by a premium (IBC) blade. The blade and chip breaker are both about 1/8" thick. The sole on the #5 plane was slightly concave end to end. The IBC blade seemed to actually make this worse than a Hock iron and chip breaker. The Hock is made of O1 and my recollection is the IBC is made of A2. In this case the composition of the steel was likely not as much a factor as the thickness of the blades and cap irons. Another problem is the IBC chip breaker couldn't be set close to the edge without making adjustment impossible.

Some of the original blades on his planes were in pretty bad shape. If one is using a plane for smoothing, a few pits on the edge is all it takes to make the work unsatisfactory. A plane being used as a scrub or even a jointer may not have as much of a problem with a few pits along the edge. Of course if a new blade can be afforded then considering replacement is only natural. Sometimes bringing an old blade back into use isn't as practical as buying a new blade.

Then comes a thought about a question posed in the post starting this thread:

A bonus question, do you use different steels for different planes? Again, I'm wondering if O1 might be better for a smoother for light cuts and an air-hardened steel for jacks taking more stock per pass.

My low angle bevel up jack plane has an A2 blade and is used primarily for shooting. When first starting with this blade it seemed a bit 'chippy' in use. Now after a few years and 2 or 3 times of regrinding the bevel it seems to be less likely to chip in use. As this blade is much thicker than most of my blades, it is a bit tricky to hone it by hand. One of my #60 (-1/2) type planes has an A2 blade. The funny thing in this case is the LN plane and blade are quite a bit heavier than my other #60 type planes. Often the lighter planes get grabbed first for most work. If something is getting a finish cut, the LN plane is chosen since I know the blade is likely to still be sharp from the last time it was used. As a caveat, my right hand has an old injury that makes it difficult for me to apply a lot of pressure to properly hold a block plane. In my case a lighter plane is easier to handle. A heavier block plane may be a better choice for others.

In summation the A2 blades are great for their ability to hold an edge doing a demanding job, but they can be a bit more work to put back to work once they need honing. My O1 Hock blades take a very good edge and tend to be easier to get back to work once they become worn. There always seems to be a trade off between longevity of an edge and the ease with which it can be maintained. O1 steel can be worked easily on my oil stones. My A1 blades need to get sharpened before the freezing weather has my water stones out of commission for the winter.

jtk

[Patrick Chase]

Skip, as one who actually has used all the steels, and actually does build furniture with them (rather than collecting tools for decorating benches), I will reaffirm that sharp is sharp, and that "newer compositions" are not just for hogging, but also the finest surfaces.
Derek

That flies in the face of basic physics and metallurgy.

Non-PM high-alloy steels have much coarser structures and specifically larger carbides than low-alloy ones. Those carbides are not very strongly retained within the matrix, and tend to chip out quite easily. I can put a very fine edge on D2 or M4 using diamond paste, but it doesn't stay fine for long because the most exposed carbides chip out in short order. Nothing you can possibly do in sharpening can change that, other than to increase the bevel and thereby provide more support to the carbides along the edge, but that brings its own costs.

As George has pointed out several times, the higher alloy steels tend to lose their initial edge quickly but then stabilize for a very long time in a "slightly degraded" state once the most vulnerable carbides have chipped out. That's great for tasks where you don't need the sharpest possible edge, or where the wood is so nasty that no steel can hold a super-sharp edge. It's not-so-great if you need the keenest edge possible.

As you said in a previous post, processing can influence how big the carbides become and therefore the size of the chips, but with the exception of PM there is no processing that can possibly make them anywhere near as small as in O1/W1/HCS.

Powdered metallurgy changes things quite a bit, assuming that all of the downstream processing is optimal.

[Christopher Charles]

Derek,

For those of us here in NA without exposure to the nasty woods of down under, I'd be curious to hear about your recent experience working with maple (recognizing that you may not have done as much handtool work on your kitchen cabinets). Would be an interesting comparison for those of us trying to sort out how much longer the new steels stay sharp and cost benefits of investing in new steel/sharpening media etc.

Best,
Chris

[Derek Cohen]

That flies in the face of basic physics and metallurgy.

Patrick, my comments are based on experience and not the laws of physics. Theory (supported by microscopic images) says that steels such as D2 and M4 have a large and coarse grain structure. In actual use, this is not apparent. It may eventually be so, as the edge wears, but that is a lot later in the life of that edge. By then I would have re-sharpened the blade.

M4 can become frighteningly sharp. I have two beater 3/4" chisels on my bench, one in 3V and another in M4 ( beaters as they are durable enough to be used on anything). I had a visit from Rob Lee a few days ago, and ground and honed the M4 as part of a demo of the CBN wheels. Honing took under 1 minute. The edge was impressive. It will remain that way for a long time.

I am not suggesting steel like this for others. The only reason I have it is because of tests I was involved in a few years ago. I would not go out of my way to purchase it as it does require specialised equipment - not anything more than many already own (CBN wheel to grind and Spyderco stones) - but most would struggle to get an edge on other equipment. The point is that, theory set aside, practice shows that these steels are usable and durable.

Regards from Perth

Derek

[Derek Cohen]

Derek,

For those of us here in NA without exposure to the nasty woods of down under, I'd be curious to hear about your recent experience working with maple (recognizing that you may not have done as much handtool work on your kitchen cabinets). Would be an interesting comparison for those of us trying to sort out how much longer the new steels stay sharp and cost benefits of investing in new steel/sharpening media etc.

Best,
Chris

Hi Chris

I love working with Hard Maple!

Compared with Jarrah and other West Australian hardwoods, it has a tight grain that leaves a smooth, silky surface when planed. It planes very easily, more easily than, say, Jarrah. Visually, the shaving holds together better. As a result I get long, straight chips - where as for Jarrah one ends up with short and broken shavings.

Using either a chipbreaker or a high cutting angle, Maple planes with- or against the grain. I did notice that it has a tendency to tear out when the grain reverses suddenly, which was apparent on the jointer. This was easily removed with a hand plane (I handplane to final dimension, before sanding to achieve a uniformly flat, non-ridged surface. Raking light in a kitchen would show up any plane tracks).

In some ways the Maple reminded me of working with Cherry. Both of these are a pleasure because of the final finish, which was clear and polished off the plane.

Regards from Perth

Derek

[Skip Helms]

Derek; it's a journey. My second PM blade just came and I like it. I like the O1 blades I've used on the rehab planes. Now that I think about it, it might be the mass of the thicker blades I like more than which steel. Making mostly guitars -- sometimes in figured woods -- I've found the pitch angle of attack matters a lot. Since I homebrewed my high-angle smoothers with thick O1 steel, that might be why I think fondly of them. I don't use them for hours at a time, though.

The plane I use most is a 2" finger rabbet plane I bandsawed out of a piece of 1" brass plate. It's only used for shaping braces. IIRC, the iron in that used to be a radial saw blade. As someone here mentioned, sharp is sharp.

Cheers, sh

[Stewie Simpson]

For me, some of yesterday was spent helping a new friend figure out why he was having trouble with some of his planes. One of the problems seemed to be increased by a premium (IBC) blade. The blade and chip breaker are both about 1/8" thick. The sole on the #5 plane was slightly concave end to end. The IBC blade seemed to actually make this worse than a Hock iron and chip breaker. The Hock is made of O1 and my recollection is the IBC is made of A2. In this case the composition of the steel was likely not as much a factor as the thickness of the blades and cap irons. Another problem is the IBC chip breaker couldn't be set close to the edge without making adjustment impossible.

Some of the original blades on his planes were in pretty bad shape. If one is using a plane for smoothing, a few pits on the edge is all it takes to make the work unsatisfactory. A plane being used as a scrub or even a jointer may not have as much of a problem with a few pits along the edge. Of course if a new blade can be afforded then considering replacement is only natural. Sometimes bringing an old blade back into use isn't as practical as buying a new blade.

Then comes a thought about a question posed in the post starting this thread:



My low angle bevel up jack plane has an A2 blade and is used primarily for shooting. When first starting with this blade it seemed a bit 'chippy' in use. Now after a few years and 2 or 3 times of regrinding the bevel it seems to be less likely to chip in use. As this blade is much thicker than most of my blades, it is a bit tricky to hone it by hand. One of my #60 (-1/2) type planes has an A2 blade. The funny thing in this case is the LN plane and blade are quite a bit heavier than my other #60 type planes. Often the lighter planes get grabbed first for most work. If something is getting a finish cut, the LN plane is chosen since I know the blade is likely to still be sharp from the last time it was used. As a caveat, my right hand has an old injury that makes it difficult for me to apply a lot of pressure to properly hold a block plane. In my case a lighter plane is easier to handle. A heavier block plane may be a better choice for others.

In summation the A2 blades are great for their ability to hold an edge doing a demanding job, but they can be a bit more work to put back to work once they need honing. My O1 Hock blades take a very good edge and tend to be easier to get back to work once they become worn. There always seems to be a trade off between longevity of an edge and the ease with which it can be maintained. O1 steel can be worked easily on my oil stones. My A1 blades need to get sharpened before the freezing weather has my water stones out of commission for the winter.

jtk

Jim; do you find it more difficult to raise a burred edge on A2 steel, as you progress through your finer grit stones.

Stewie;