Page 5 of 9 FirstFirst 123456789 LastLast
Results 61 to 75 of 126

Thread: First and last Stanley handplane restoration

  1. #61
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Perth, Australia
    Posts
    9,492
    I'm coming into this thread quite late. I find it another example of how many opinions there are, and that there is no one "right" answer. There are just too many exceptions to a "rule". For example:

    Plane weight only becomes an issue if you are wielding it all day long ... and even then it depends on the work you are doing. For example, there is a big difference between a jointer and a smoother in size and weight. But how much time goes into using each? This may be a factor for someone who is working at it full time, but for weekend warriors ... really?!

    The planes that are more of an issue are the jacks and the scrubs, if you are working with rough boards to flatten them before using a jointer. How many here actually spend all day long with a jack in one hand? I certainly do not. I use machines for a lot of early preparation, and while I still do a fair bit of dimensioning with handplanes, it is not to the extent that I refer to myself as a Neanderthal.

    I use jointers and smoothers mostly. How much jointing does one do that the weight of the plane becomes so critical? Smoothing is a final step, not a phase of preparation. On weekends I can be in the shop for 16+ hours. I still could not say that more than 2 hours is given over to a jointer. The same may be said of a smoother. I use other time sawing, sharpening, marking, measuring, scraping, thinking, etc. The mental image of a feverish demon with a plane in the hands working up a sweat ... just is not true. I get through a lot of work (the recent Sofa Table took 3 weekends) and I am not breathing hard.

    Here's a question about planes: which jointer and which smoother would you choose when you make that final shaving, and to do so without a test shaving? A do-or-die situation (not that I would recommend this)? Which do you trust to do the job? I include here planing without concern for chatter or tearout, and irrespective of grain direction (after all, planing book-matched panels has the grain going in opposite directions).

    I get excellent results from planes that are BD, BU, heavy, and light. I would state that the absolute trust first goes to a BU smoother. I would have no hesitation with a Veritas BU Smoother. I would also trust a HNT Gordon BD smoother (with the iron set on a glass setting plate!). Both are high angle planes. I would rather use a double iron smoother, whether Stanley #3, LN #3 or a Veritas Custom #4, since I achieve superb results with these, however they all need a test cut to ensure that they are set up perfectly (most of the time they are close to perfect, but just not quite there).

    I could take a few shavings with a Marcou BU smoother - which is the best smoother I have used ever. This one weighs in at 1oz under 8lbs! Would I like to use it all day? Absolutely not (I am not Popeye). But, as I pointed out earlier, a few swipes are generally all that are needed, and this plane is simply amazing - high cutting angle and it leaves a shine in its wake. Why don't I use it more often? Eh .. I prefer sharpening for BD.

    Regards from Perth

    Derek

  2. #62
    Well, when LN wants $750 for a new bronze #4, I'm thinking that learning to restore is still a good move - for me anyway.
    Fred

  3. #63
    Quote Originally Posted by Derek Cohen View Post
    [...]
    Here's a question about planes: which jointer and which smoother would you choose when you make that final shaving, and to do so without a test shaving? A do-or-die situation (not that I would recommend this)? Which do you trust to do the job? I include here planing without concern for chatter or tearout, and irrespective of grain direction (after all, planing book-matched panels has the grain going in opposite directions).
    [...]
    Regards from Perth

    Derek
    For me, that would be my Stanley #4. It's an old low-knob model. It does have a Ray Iles iron, but that's because the original was too far gone. Sharpen it first, set the capiron close to the edge if I think that'll be neccessary and start the cut on a skew.

    I also have a #3, but the silly thing has a right hand thread on the adjuster, making it more unpredictable for me. Some wooden smoothers, but I am not yet good enough in setting them for a very fine shaving. And I have a finely fettled heavy infill that I almost never use.

    BTW, I don't fear a mistake on those last smoothing shavings. Shit happens and can usually be cleaned up with a few extra plane strokes.

  4. #64
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Perth, Australia
    Posts
    9,492
    Hi Kees

    Don't forget this is a hypothetical. But it makes you think about how easily and reliably it is to use a particular plane. This is essentially the main difference between a new plane, such as a Veritas or LN, and a restored vintage Stanley (to take us back to the OP). All these planes can be set up to work as well as one another. How you feel about using them is also important. Familiarity with the large backlash of the Stanleys is important for those used to modern planes.

    Regards from Perth

    Derek

  5. #65
    Yes, familiarity with the plane is important. Collecting planes is kind of counter productive (but it's fun of course).

    Before 2012 (the year of the big chipbreaker debacle!) I wouldn't have been so sure and I probably should have answered that the ROS was my final smooting tool.

  6. #66
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Location
    Dublin, CA
    Posts
    4,119
    Quote Originally Posted by Frederick Skelly View Post
    Well, when LN wants $750 for a new bronze #4, I'm thinking that learning to restore is still a good move - for me anyway.
    Fred
    The bronze L-N #4 is $350, though the more appropriate comparison to a used plane is probably the iron version for $300. The classic (non-custom) Veritas #4 is $220 for that matter.

  7. #67
    In November 2009 I tried out a Marcou "smoothing plane" at a Lie Nielsen event. A nine pound block plane. David Weaver reminded me recently that on one forum I said planing with the thing was like playing ping pong with a frying pan. You can do it but not too deftly. The surface it produce was none too fine. My #3 smoothing plane is 47 ounces.

    I got called a lot of nasty names for my evaluation of this plane. One guy who called himself "lataxe" (his real name was David Trusty), apparently alerted by one of the Marcou faithful, joined the forum just to berate me. My friends got a chuckle that some old man called me "feeble". The guy registered for the forum 11/21/09, made four posts and disappeared.

    We have come a long way since then. At that time people were insisting that a heavier plane was needed for a fine surface and the makers obliged. Forum members insisted that a thick iron was helpful for reducing tear out, and that a cap iron's office was to stiffen the iron. The makers responded with thicker irons and thicker cap irons. The double iron was called a hoax. This resulted in an ineffective "improved chipbreaker". The importance of a fine mouth was trumpeted and the makers responded with minuscule openings and adjustable mouth planes. The old steel was called too soft and the makers responded with ever nastier steel. High angle planing was championed and then high angle planes were produced.

    I would say that the manufacturers were more following the herd than leading. One plane maker showed himself flattening a piece of wood: instead of one of his $5000 planes he used a milling machine and abrasives. Did he ever learn to use a plane?

  8. #68
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Perth, Australia
    Posts
    9,492
    Now now Warren, that Marcou may indeed feel like a "nine pound block plane" to you, but it is an exceptionally good nine pound block plane!

    I think that you miss my point: weight may mean a lot to you if you were using a Marcou all day long, but then even you would not use a smoother all day. Most weekend warriors would not use a smoother all day on a weekend. Mass comes to be less meaningful in planes like these. What does have importance is how well they work. If one cannot use a chipbreaker (and all these planes had their heyday <2012 when we began discussing the chipbreaker in seriousness on the fori), then the Marcou is a winner. If you want to take final shavings over a panel, and you plonk this plane on top and just push it along, it will take fine, full shavings and leave a silky surface. That result is undeniable.

    Incidentally,
    David Trusty (or "Lataxe") is not only a fine woodworker, but one of the most eloquent writers I have come across. The fori are the poorer for his absence. He had a knack of recognising bullies and turning them into baloney.

    Regards from Perth

    Derek

  9. #69
    I suspect that if you don't train, everything feels heavier.

  10. #70
    Let's see...the Take Frid bench in the late 1970's, the Japanese tool thing in the 1980's, the super blade stuff in the early 1990's (Hock, etc.), the aforementioned Swiss Army Plane approach to woodworking (one body and many, many blades), and the vise-less, 'tree as bench' fad now. Any fads I missed?

  11. #71
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Longview WA
    Posts
    27,433
    Blog Entries
    1
    Any fads I missed?
    Using a #7 for a smoother?

    jtk
    "A pessimist sees the difficulty in every opportunity; an optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty."
    - Sir Winston Churchill (1874-1965)

  12. #72
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Location
    Marina del Rey, Ca
    Posts
    1,937
    Quote Originally Posted by Todd Stock View Post
    ...Any fads I missed?
    Lightweight planes for girly-men?
    "Anything seems possible when you don't know what you're doing."

  13. #73
    Krenov planes? That really was a fad for a while. It's quite some time ago since I saw a thread about these.

  14. #74
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    2,534
    Quote Originally Posted by Kees Heiden View Post
    Krenov planes? That really was a fad for a while. It's quite some time ago since I saw a thread about these.
    With an luck it will stay that way.

  15. #75
    At one time there was even a guy selling them for something like 600 dollars or so!

Posting Permissions

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