Sargeant Planes - How Good are they?

[Joe Beaulieu]

I bought a couple of very cheap Sargeant 414 planes - basically Stanley #5's, off of EBay. I just got them today. I have to say they seem closer to a Bedrock than a Bailey, and for the very short money I paid, I am really happy with the bargain! The nicer of the two was obviously owned by a knowledgeable guy. It is very well set up, with the frog honed nicely, and very subtle camber on the blade, and the sole very flat and true. I am very psyched about these. Why were they so inexpensive? They seem better than the rusted out globs of Bailey junk that I have bought before with broken totes and cracked sides etc. These planes are really nice. I paid less than $20 for each of them, and only $35 for a pair of very reasonable jointers.

What gives?

Joe

[Patrick Chase]

I bought a couple of very cheap Sargeant 414 planes - basically Stanley #5's, off of EBay. I just got them today. I have to say they seem closer to a Bedrock than a Bailey, and for the very short money I paid, I am really happy with the bargain! The nicer of the two was obviously owned by a knowledgeable guy. It is very well set up, with the frog honed nicely, and very subtle camber on the blade, and the sole very flat and true. I am very psyched about these. Why were they so inexpensive? They seem better than the rusted out globs of Bailey junk that I have bought before with broken totes and cracked sides etc. These planes are really nice. I paid less than $20 for each of them, and only $35 for a pair of very reasonable jointers.

What gives?

Joe

My guess: There aren't resources like Blood and Gore, the (shudder) type studies, or the many "how to fix up a Stanley junker from Ebay" tutorials for brands like Sargeant, so it's harder to figure out what you're buying and what to do with it.

[Nicholas Lawrence]

I have a Sargent combination plane I use all the time. It is a quality tool.

[steven c newman]

They are cheaper because of the name thing. There are the "affordable" 400 series of sargent planes, and then there are the "Auto-set" ones that go for collector prices. DonW should be coming by with a site about all things Sargent. I've had a few of the 414s.....not too bad of a plane. The block planes are a bit...different. Still good, but they had to be made around the patents of Stanley.....so things were made just enough different to kepp Sargent out of court.

[don wilwol]

If you head over to my site, you'll find some dating information, http://www.timetestedtools.com/typin...ch-planes.html

Sargent was a strong competitor to Stanley at one time. They made decent tools, and like Stanley, their quality declined in the later years. They to are still in business, they just no longer make hand planes. The lower prices are due to a lot less guys collecting them, and they also made a lot of them that survived.

As Steve mentioned, there are differnt series, the single numbers, (#7-#22) are also called Shaw patent, are similar to bedrock (I guess I shouldn't really say similar, but meant to compete with them). These usually sell for very similar prices as the bedrock. The 700 series are the auto set's, and very very good users. The 400 series is the normal Bailey style, but they didn't have the frog adjustment screw. You will find users who prefer a Sargent due to a slightly heavier casting.

I doubt you will be sorry about your purchase. Just be careful, the slope is very slipery and as you get into it, some of the Sargents come with a pretty big price tag, just like the rest of the vintage guys.

[Charles Rogers]

They're fine tools. One of the neat things about Sargent planes is that they were manufactured under contract for other companies. If you find a Fulton plane or a Craftsman, it was likely made by Sargent. One of my smoothers is a Sargent-Hercules painted in John Deere green and yellow. I'm getting ready to restore a Sargent 409 that's in rough shape.

[Joe Beaulieu]

Hey all, especially Don,

Thank you for the information. I found out why the nicer of the two was so cheap - the depth adjustment is either cross-threaded or very wrong somehow - I cant get he knob to move with pliers, let alone by hand. This is after I remove the frog from the plane! I may be able to save it, but I may also need a new frog for this one. Too bad - it was the nicer of the two. They are not interchangeable either. Sad.

I also recently got a #4 with a cracked tote. It is also a very nice plane. I will epoxy the tote and see what happens.

Thanks folks

Joe

[don wilwol]

Hey all, especially Don,

Thank you for the information. I found out why the nicer of the two was so cheap - the depth adjustment is either cross-threaded or very wrong somehow - I cant get he knob to move with pliers, let alone by hand. This is after I remove the frog from the plane! I may be able to save it, but I may also need a new frog for this one. Too bad - it was the nicer of the two. They are not interchangeable either. Sad.

I also recently got a #4 with a cracked tote. It is also a very nice plane. I will epoxy the tote and see what happens.

Thanks folks

Joe

I would contact the seller and get a refund. You have nothing to loose and if it was not stated its a misrepresentation of the condition.

[Charles Rogers]

Just a thought...the threads on some Sargents are backwards to the Stanley design. Are you sure you're turning them the correct direction? Again, just a thought.

[Mark Engel]

The threaded stud that the depth adjuster rides on is easily replaceable, if that is the problem. The depth adjustment nut is also replaceable, if you can get it off.