A very good idea

[Brian Ashton]

I thought this needed posting as it is an excellent remake of an old work horse. Credit were credit it due... It's made by Scott Grandstaff. I think with a few files, second hand blade and a jewelers fret saw you could have a nice rebate plane.

http://handtoolmakers.com/Shop_Made/...ottomHeight=25

[Sam Takeuchi]

Sargent used to make block rabbet plane, but this one is more elegant and looks nicer. Sargent one had sides that were bulging to accommodate the open sides, looked almost like camel's hump. This one looks so sleek.

[Derek Cohen]

It is not a simple matter to do this. The grey iron is fragile. Of a couple of attempts (by others, not myself) these types of modifications do not hold up for long. Even the LN version (which I have), which is ductile iron - a much hardier material - is criticised for having some flex. No, I have not noticed this in mine.

This comment should take nothing away from Scott's beautful work. Just a warning for imitators.

Regards from Perth

Derek

[george wilson]

But,were the originals ductile iron?

[Derek Cohen]

Hi George

Of course the originals were not ductile iron. However their designs made allowance for this and included reinforcement - hence the extra curve in the (for example) the Stanley #10 1/2.

Here is a #5 1/2 ..



... and the #10 1/2 ..



Scott was very thoughtful in his modification and removed as little iron as possible.

Regards from Perth

Derek

[David Keller NC]

Originally Posted by Brian Ashton

I thought this needed posting as it is an excellent remake of an old work horse. Credit were credit it due... It's made by Scott Grandstaff. I think with a few files, second hand blade and a jewelers fret saw you could have a nice rebate plane.

Brain - One other item is needed - a replacement blade. To make an effective rabbet plane, one wants the blade edge to go a few thousandths past the outside edge of the side wall. Nothing against Scott (I frequently spend way too much shop time making tools), but the L-N rabbet block's too inexpensive to make this a cost-effective project, and the antique Sargents go for way more money than the L-N tool. Of course, if the motivation is "fun", then cost analysis is irrelevant.

[george wilson]

Not being a collector of Stanley type planes,I am not aware of these finer points. I have a LN rabbet block plane.

[Derek Cohen]

Hi George

With your skills I am surprised that you have even the LN (which I have as well)

Here is the LN #60 1/2 block plane ..



and here is the LN rabbet block plane ...



.. and finally the Sargent original ..



I had considered the same modification of Scott a few years ago, and even collected the bits and pieces for it. But the feedback from another doing the same, who finished his first, was negatove - it snapped!

The LN is in ductile iron,. The Sargent is grey iron (as are all Stanley planes). The Stanley#10 and the Sargent blocks all have a rep for stress cracks - hence so many are brazed.

Regards from Perth

Derek

[george wilson]

I have both those LN planes,and 4 or 5 more.

[Brian Ashton]

Derek: I think you may be missing what I'm seeing in Scott's remake. Scott's left a great deal of the cheek metal - as much if not more than the sargent. When you look at it and work out how the plane will react to the forces exerted I'd say Scott's would be more rigid than the sargent. Where Scott's fall short is in clearing the shavings in those cheek openings. I'd say a user will need to clear the shavings more often depending on the wood being worked - especially something like pine.

But over all I'd say it's a good way to recycle an old worn out stanley. If I see one in a garage sale for a few bucks I'll be giving it a try.

David: My punctuation isn't the best as a result I think you missed where I said a second hand blade will be needed.

[Eric Brown]

I remember reading in one of the mags about this conversion. In it, the existing blade was ground along the one edge leaving an extension to go into the cutout. Stanleys have a lot a adjuster width and can simply be shifted over.

No new blade needed.

Eric

[Derek Cohen]

Hi Brian

I am saying the same as you. In Scott's mod, there is a large amount of cheek. All I was doing was to warn those interested in replicating Scott to do so exactly and not do so only in spirit. That is, it is important to leave as much cheek as he did as otherwise the construction becomes weak. The pictures I posted were to demonstrate that Stanley were aware of this issue - it is not a matter of simply cutting away cheeks to fit a blade, and doing so willy-nilly. Scott produced a terrific solution, and craftsmanship, as usual.

And George, just in case my comment to you was also misinterpreted, I was joking when I wrote that I was surprised at you having LN planes. I have several as well ... because they are damn fine tools. On the other hand I was not joking when I expressed my belief that you had planes of others since I just somehow imagined that you had all these wonderfully crafted planes that far surpassed anything that could be purchased!

Regards from Perth

Derek

[Brian Ashton]

Since it's my thread I'll hijack it. How do I embed pictures instead of links. It's much better that way

[Derek Cohen]

Hi Brian

You need to host them on a website first, such as photobucket.com, which is what I use.

This is what an uploaded image in your Photobucket album looks like ..



Copy the "IMG Code" file to the Message tablet, and paste it in.

Regards from Perth

Derek

[Jim Koepke]

The problem with imbedded images or images with links is if the picture is removed from the link, then it disappears from the message.
If the image is attached, then it stays on the SMC server.

I have seen this happen in a lot of old threads.

jim