Frog Position Question

[Derek Cohen]

Pat, the cap iron/chipbreaker has been documented preceding Stanley by at least 200 years. Warren and Kees supplied much information in this regard, and it was discussed to death several years ago. The point is, it was not Stanley's invention.

Regards from Perth

Derek

[Pat Barry]

Pat, the cap iron/chipbreaker has been documented preceding Stanley by at least 200 years. Warren and Kees supplied much information in this regard, and it was discussed to death several years ago. The point is, it was not Stanley's invention.

Regards from Perth

Derek

Cool. I'd like to see that reference for historical interest. Can someone provide it?

[Nicholas Lawrence]

I didn't see any mention in the text of the use of the cap iron as a chip breaker! Was that actually stated somewhere in the patent or just figured out by folks later on?

Remember you are only supposed to be able to patent new innovations. So there has always been an incentive to describe existing ideas differently, because that way it might slip by the patent examiner, and you might be able to get a new patent, even if the idea is really not new.

[Patrick Chase]

Economics were never far behind in the minds of the Stanley people! They had to, they were running a factory. And the Stanley planes were still at least twice as expensive as the wooden competition.

Indeed. As I said in a previous post, I think that the classic Stanley chip-breaker is an outstanding design (and superior to the current crop) when you take economics into account. Even with modern CNC machining the LN-style cap irons have to be significantly more expensive to manufacture, and on top of that they create additional work for the end-user to set them up with a good tip angle.

I found it interesting that LV resisted moving to LN-style cap irons for a very long time (until they intro'd the custom plane line). Unfortunately our market and trade press can be spectacularly ignorant, so in the end LV had no real choice. I can't count the number of times I've seen reviewers list a "solid cap iron" as an advantage, or criticize a plane for using a Stanley-style cap iron.

[Pat Barry]

... they create additional work for the end-user to set them up with a good tip angle.

Why is that? Why would they leave it to the end-user when most of the end-users don't understand the subtleties of the chip breaker? Don't they understand it themselves, or care? Don't they keep up with the latest WW forum scuttlebutt?

[Patrick Chase]

Cool. I'd like to see that reference for historical interest. Can someone provide it?

My-employer's-search-engine-that-I-cannot-name is your friend.

Start with "Double iron 18th century hand plane" or "Seaton Chest".

In the West double irons were an 18th century innovation, i.e. ~100 years before Bailey. I don't know the timing in Japan.

[Kees Heiden]

Pat, here is some interesting historical context on the double iron plane from Steve Voigt's website:

http://blackdogswoodshop.blogspot.nl...on-part-1.html

[Patrick Chase]

Why is that? Why would they leave it to the end-user when most of the end-users don't understand the subtleties of the chip breaker? Don't they understand it themselves, or care? Don't they keep up with the latest WW forum scuttlebutt?

One guess: A low-knowledge user probably wouldn't be able to tell the difference in performance with a low-angle cap iron face, but would risk jamming shavings in the plane's throat with a highly-angled face.

If I were in LN or LV's shoes I'd ship a configuration that works "well enough" for a user that doesn't know how to fettle their plane, and assume that the rest will take care of themselves.

[Patrick Chase]

One other remark: The designers who used "solid" cap irons before Bailey weren't being dumb or inefficient. They simply didn't have the benefit of sheet-metal stamping (which was a 19th century innovation).

[Pat Barry]

Pat, here is some interesting historical context on the double iron plane from Steve Voigt's website:

http://blackdogswoodshop.blogspot.nl...on-part-1.html

Thanks Kees, that was an interesting read.

[Pat Barry]

One guess: A low-knowledge user probably wouldn't be able to tell the difference in performance with a low-angle cap iron face, but would risk jamming shavings in the plane's throat with a highly-angled face.

If I were in LN or LV's shoes I'd ship a configuration that works "well enough" for a user that doesn't know how to fettle their plane, and assume that the rest will take care of themselves.

I think that they should include instructions as to how to properly set up the cap iron for optimizing performance. That's what I expect from a technology provider.

[Pat Barry]

My-employer's-search-engine-that-I-cannot-name is your friend.

Start with "Double iron 18th century hand plane" or "Seaton Chest".

In the West double irons were an 18th century innovation, i.e. ~100 years before Bailey. I don't know the timing in Japan.

Thanks for the search topics. By the way, has anyone found a use for the B... search engine? That thing is the worst. I have Google set as my defaults but occasionally something happens to my settings (Windows update??) and I get search results full of advertiser links as the top hits and then realize, oh its that blasted B---- again.

[Patrick Chase]

Thanks for the search topics. By the way, has anyone found a use for the B... search engine? That thing is the worst. I have Google set as my defaults but occasionally something happens to my settings (Windows update??) and I get search results full of advertiser links as the top hits and then realize, oh its that blasted B---- again.

I couldn't answer that even if I wanted to :-).

[Warren Mickley]

Both Lee Valley and Lie Nielsen have promoted high angle planes for difficult woods for many years. They still promote these clumsy and expensive solutions to tear out.

Lee Valley says " our state-of-the-art [bevel up] smoothing plane is the tool to use for the final finish on surfaces, especially woods of difficult grain patterns. ... The 12° bed angle, coupled with the 38° blade bevel, yields an effective cutting angle of 50°, often called York pitch. This is an ideal starting angle for minimizing tear-out on difficult wood. For the most difficult grains, even higher cutting angles (for creating Type II chips) can be achieved."

Lie Nielsen says "York Pitch will handle most tear-out prone wood well. Middle Pitch is for the most difficult woods. Using one of these frogs will eliminate the need for scrapers, in most cases." and "A big part of a chipbreaker's function is to dampen vibration".

It could be they are trying to deceive their customers, but I think they just have no idea how to use a double iron plane.

[Jim Koepke]

Both Lee Valley and Lie Nielsen have promoted high angle planes for difficult woods for many years. They still promote these clumsy and expensive solutions to tear out.

Lee Valley says " our state-of-the-art [bevel up] smoothing plane is the tool to use for the final finish on surfaces, especially woods of difficult grain patterns. ... The 12° bed angle, coupled with the 38° blade bevel, yields an effective cutting angle of 50°, often called York pitch. This is an ideal starting angle for minimizing tear-out on difficult wood. For the most difficult grains, even higher cutting angles (for creating Type II chips) can be achieved."

Lie Nielsen says "York Pitch will handle most tear-out prone wood well. Middle Pitch is for the most difficult woods. Using one of these frogs will eliminate the need for scrapers, in most cases." and "A big part of a chipbreaker's function is to dampen vibration".

It could be they are trying to deceive their customers, but I think they just have no idea how to use a double iron plane.

It seems Lie Nielsen has mostly deceived themselves. The Bailey patent mentions the cap iron's design to limit chattering while it says nothing of the ability to prevent tear out. The folks at Lie Nielsen may have not been in on the older knowledge of breaking the chip before it can lift up a splinter ahead of the blade's edge.

Once a rigid path is taken, it is difficult to change course.

jtk