Why Lie-Nielsen planes cost so much...

[Mark Gibney]

Other than being put together wrong, how was the rest of the plane? Did it seem like it would make a good user?

Jim, no I would not buy this plane, it looked very chintzy and I don't think it would make a good user at all.
A couple of years back I bought a #4 in Lowes, again out of curiosity. Good heft to the plane, but the fatal flaw is that if I positioned the chip breaker close to the cutting edge the iron cannot be advanced enough to touch the wood.
I'll have to get my metalworker buddy to cut the chipbreaker and add a pieces in. Not sure how successful this will be.
Lowes now carry some Jorgensen planes, and their #4 looks pretty good on the shelf - very heavy and a 1/8" thick iron. But they are orange, a strange color for a handplane, to me.
Haven't tried them.

[Jim Koepke]

Jim, no I would not buy this plane, it looked very chintzy and I don't think it would make a good user at all.

Thanks for the reply & review Mark.

A couple of years back I bought a #4 in Lowes, again out of curiosity. Good heft to the plane, but the fatal flaw is that if I positioned the chip breaker close to the cutting edge the iron cannot be advanced enough to touch the wood.
I'll have to get my metalworker buddy to cut the chipbreaker and add a pieces in. Not sure how successful this will be.

It may be easier to open the mouth a little.

Lowes now carry some Jorgensen planes, and their #4 looks pretty good on the shelf - very heavy and a 1/8" thick iron. But they are orange, a strange color for a handplane, to me.

Orange is kind of an odd color to see at the Blue Borg.

Haven't tried them.

I have, my experience with one of their block planes is here > https://sawmillcreek.org/showthread.php?301757

jtk

[Rafael Herrera]

Here's my HomeDepot Stanley no. 4. It didn't take long to get ready. I removed the frog adjustment screw since it actually made the frog crooked, it's not really essential, so it went to the parts box. The only thing that bothers me is the size of the mouth.

In this test it's planing a block of oak and a block of poplar. I started by taking several passes going against the grain, it made the surface a bit rough, but no actual tear out. Going with the grain cleaned up the surface. On the poplar block, I planed in both directions, the surface was equally good in both cases. The plane is a bit sticky, so an oily rag was used to reduce the friction.

20231212_004659.jpg 20231212_004728.jpg

Before
20231212_004646.jpg20231212_004831.jpg

After, with a shot of the double iron.
20231212_005136.jpg 20231212_005056.jpg

Poplar shavings and surface.

20231212_005525.jpg 20231212_005540.jpg

There are just minor issues with the plane, like the plastic handles, the size of the mouth, and its weight. Other than that the plane is 100% functional.

Rafael

[mike stenson]

Interesting thread drift here.

[Mark Gibney]

It may be easier to open the mouth a little.

No - when the adjusting nut is spun all the way to the end of the thread the cutter is still 1/8" away from touching wood. The chipbreaker needs to be physically longer.
It's bizarre. I took the plane apart and compared it to an older Stanley #4. Nothing jumps out at me to say ah, this is causing the problem.

To get the thread back on track - the moral is: buy LN or LV and get to woodworking!

[Jim Koepke]

It may be easier to open the mouth a little.

No - when the adjusting nut is spun all the way to the end of the thread the cutter is still 1/8" away from touching wood. The chipbreaker needs to be physically longer.
It's bizarre. I took the plane apart and compared it to an older Stanley #4. Nothing jumps out at me to say ah, this is causing the problem.

To get the thread back on track - the moral is: buy LN or LV and get to woodworking!

Okay, now I understand the problem.

It sounds like the cutout for the adjuster needs to be farther away from the part that diverts the chips.

Cap Iron dwg Corrected.png

In the above image it may be the distance at A is not enough. The sticking point is if the other dimensions are sufficient to accommodate the difference.

One of my planes (a #113) had an incorrect cap iron with a similar problem. Epoxying a piece of steel at the bottom of the adjuster rectangle did help until I eventually found the proper cap iron for the plane.

jtk

[Charles Taylor]

Okay, now I understand the problem.

It sounds like the cutout for the adjuster needs to be farther away from the part that diverts the chips.

Cap Iron dwg Corrected.png

In the above image it may be the distance at A is not enough. The sticking point is if the other dimensions are sufficient to accommodate the difference.

One of my planes (a #113) had an incorrect cap iron with a similar problem. Epoxying a piece of steel at the bottom of the adjuster rectangle did help until I eventually found the proper cap iron for the plane.

jtk

I have such a Stanley #4, bought new from Woodcraft in the early 2000s. I figured out the problem was exactly as Jim describes. A Hock chipbreaker fixed it for me as the cutout is more correctly located.

[Rafael Herrera]

If the cutter can't descend below the plane sole, then the chipbreaker has been damaged or it's been switched for one from a different manufacturer, at worst it's a manufacturing error. There are some aspects of hand tool use that become obvious when one is involved in setting them up. A boutique plane may be ready to use, but when things don't work, the lack of understanding leaves one perplexed. Like the viewer that sent his LN plane to Rex Kruger (https://youtu.be/pnV27QVLmzA). There was nothing wrong w the plane, but the viewer couldn't get it to work.

The OP question was why these planes cost so much. Well, the answer is because a lot of time is spent manufacturing them. They're ready to go. Are they better than an old plane, or even one of these Home Depot planes? Not really if you know how to setup a plane.

[mike stenson]

I don't think there was a question in the original post, or?

[Rafael Herrera]

I suppose I should have just watched the video, bought a LN plane and done some real woodworking.

[mike stenson]

I only own one LN plane. Shocking, I know. But, given the posts here.. it'd seem that the average person here would love to see them close up shop.

This is why we have lost most manufacturing in the US though, and that is a shame.

[Bruce Page]

I only own one LN plane. Shocking, I know. But, given the posts here.. it'd seem that the average person here would love to see them close up shop.

This is why we have lost most manufacturing in the US though, and that is a shame.

I don’t understand where that comment is coming from Mike. 90% of the comments I read are in praise of L&N.

[Jim Koepke]

I only own one LN plane. Shocking, I know. But, given the posts here.. it'd seem that the average person here would love to see them close up shop.

This is why we have lost most manufacturing in the US though, and that is a shame.

I'm with Bruce, I actually have a couple LN planes. They both came much more ready to use than almost all of the Stanley/Bailey or even Bedrock planes that have come my way. They were purchased because of their price being better than what the same Stanley planes would cost.

I am a firm believer in buying old planes and learning how to restore them. It is understandable that many others do not have the same background as mine of having worked with fixing up an old car or bicycle among other mechanical devices. For those folks, buying a plane that is set up at the factory is a good choice.

jtk

[Rafael Herrera]

If I needed a tool that I could only get from Lie Nielsen, I'd certainly buy it from them. So far I've gotten by with products from other brands, other independent American makers, or vintage tools. I certainly don't base my decisions on the idea that I need to save them from going out of business. It's their job to make competitive products and stay a viable company.

[Derek Cohen]

While it is no doubt valid that some purchase LN and Veritas planes with the expectation that better/more expensive tools make for better craftsmen, there is no question that the construction quality of these planes is far superior to that of Stanley and Record (and from their best period - new generation Stanley are very poor relations). Further to this, there is also no doubt that a new, out-of-the-box LN or Veritas plane is close to 90% of its potential while an old but untuned Stanley/Record is probably about 50% so. (These are my guestimates, so don't get your panties in a bunch).

These are quite different statements as to whether one prefers the modern over the vintage. There are arguments both ways. For example, Stanley's lighter heft may be preferred, or that the ignificantly higher cost of the modern counterpart may be less affordable. This latter point is the main argument for many with the observation that time taken to tune a vintage plane gets it to the same performance. After all, performance is all that counts, not so? Well, apparently not, otherwise why different prices and preference for the different makes if motor car manufacturers? Look at the materials that into a LN and those that go into a Porsche.

At the end of the day, I do not look at the tools used by a woodworker; I look at what they have built with their tools. I enjoy looking at the workshops and tools of others, but I am more impressed by their expertise in joinery and finishing.

I have both modern and vintage tools, along with a number of tools I have designed and built, and part of my joy of building comes from the pleasure in crafting with a well-crafted tool, regardless of the name on the tool.

Regards from Perth

Derek