Which shoulder plane?

[Driver]

Belated Christmas greetings to everyone. I've been enjoying several days of doing nothing at all and this is the first time I've had a look at the BB since last weekend.

Now to woodwork business. I have a bit of spare cash left over after Christmas and I want to buy a shoulder plane as an addition to the collection and also because the next big project will involve some M&T joints and a shoulder plane will be a big help in cleaning them up.

I have had a hard look at both the HNT Gordon and Clifton versions. There's an obvious difference in price. Carba-Tec and Timbecon sell the various HNT Gordon shoulder planes for around $150 and the Clifton 410 & 420 for $367 and $399 respectively.

I prefer to use jarrah for most of my work but occasionally use softwoods (pine and oregon).

So: the Gordon planes with their steeper blade angle (60 degrees) are designed for hardwood. Are they any good on softwood? Does it matter when most of the clean-up work on M&T joints is endgrain planing? Which width is the most useful (they vary from half-inch through three-quarter to one inch)?

Of the two Clifton sizes, the 420 is 200mm long and 19 mm wide and the 410 is 138 mm long and 18 mm wide. Both have a primary cutting angle of 25 degrees. Which of these two would be the most useful for general joint clean-up work?

Any advice you can give me would be very welcome.

Regards

Col

[derekcohen]

Col

The answer is a little deceptive.

I would go for a lower blade angle setting in a shoulder plane. If you are cutting end grain, regardless of the timber, you want something that is going to shear the grain rather than scrape it (as the higher blade angle will do). Tear out (as you expect in difficult timber, such as jarrah) is really not an issue here since it will not be seen once the M & T goes together.

Actually, the blade angles of the HNT Gordon and Cliftons are a bit deceptive. While the HNT Gordon has a blade bed of 60 degrees, the blade is bevel down. If the blade is bevelled at 30 degrees, the effective angle then is 30 degrees. The Clifton's blade is bedded at 25 degrees but bevel up. So add to this a cutting bevel of 25 degrees and you get an effective cutting angle of 50 degrees. So the effective blade angle of the HNT Gordon is actually lower than the Clifton!

Which you choose to buy is really personal. Both have a superb reputation.

If it were my money I probably would plump for the Clifton - classic design and the extra heft is useful.

I have a Stanley #93 which is 25mm wide. This is an older plane (not the current production) and I got it from one of the second hand sellers in the UK. Still cheaper (and better quality) than a new version bought locally. The advantage of the #93 is that the nose is removable and it can be used as a chisel plane. Very useful when needing to clean out up to a blind edge. This size is a good all-rounder, but it would be good to go for a 1 1/2" and a 3/4" as a combination. I think you could get close to this in the HNT Gordons for the price of one Clifton.

Let us know what you decide in the end.

Regards

Derek

p.s. give me a call to arrange a BBQ or drink.

[Wood Borer]

Driver,

I have a Lie Nielsen shoulder plane which gets a fair amount of use on tenons and occasionally halving joints. I am very happy with it.

I like Terry’s planes but I am a bit of a wimp when it comes to adjusting blades using a wedge. I know how to do it and I have done it but it is a bit awkward when you want to back off the depth just a small amount. The Lie Nielsen can do this easily as I think the Clifton can also.

Both are excellent planes and you are in a very good position having to make a decision between these two fantastic planes.

Enjoy your BBQ at Derek’s – he is an excellent host.


- Wood Borer

[Rocker]

I am going to stick my neck out here and ask why you would need a shoulder plane at all, particularly if you mainly work with jarrah. I find that I can cut perfect shoulders that need no touching up simply by using a mitre gauge on the table saw, with the end of the workpiece butted against the saw's fence. In this way the shoulders are guaranteed to be perfectly level with one another.

You may say that you need one for adjusting the thickness of the tenon, but I would maintain that, with a precision tenoning jig, you should be able to get your tenon within 0.1 mm of the required thickness, and then it is just as easy to use a wide chisel for final delicate paring.

Having said that, the Clifton and Gordon planes are beautiful tools, but IMHO they are more collector's items rather than practical necessities.

[Wood Borer]

Rocker is quite correct, there is no need to have a shoulder plane. Adjustments to tenons can be done with a chisel if necessary.

This however is heading towards the eternal and well aired debate about why people do woodwork and hand tools versus power tools etc. They are all interesting arguments and all have valid points – it comes down to personal preference.

I regularly use my shoulder plane and although Rocker might see it as a collector’s item, I see it as a worthwhile tool that does an excellent job and is a pleasure to use.

It is not a matter of one of us being right and the other wrong, consider all opinions and your final decision will be sound.


- Wood Borer

[Driver]

To Derek, Wood Borer and Rocker

I really appreciate your advice. It's always informative and, backed up as it is with hard experience, it's always practical, too.

I bought a Gordon 3/4" shoulder plane this morning. In the end it was a straightforward decision. The design of the plane is entirely practical and very appealing in its simplicity - form following function to good effect. It's also Australian! I haven't given it a full workout yet but I was impressed with the fact that, straight out of the box, it cuts a transparent shaving with very little effort. I don't think I'm going to be at all disappointed with the choice.

Derek, I'll give you a call next week and try to catch up for a beer. I'm actually on leave for a few days but due to the wonders(!) of modern communications technology, the corporate world is still able to contact me so I have the odd issue still to deal with. (I'd tidy up the grammar in that last sentence but I'm sure it will make sense to you).

Best regards

Col

[Wood Borer]

Enjoy

- Wood Borer

[Dan]

Actually, the blade angles of the HNT Gordon and Cliftons are a bit deceptive. While the HNT Gordon has a blade bed of 60 degrees, the blade is bevel down. If the blade is bevelled at 30 degrees, the effective angle then is 30 degrees. The Clifton's blade is bedded at 25 degrees but bevel up. So add to this a cutting bevel of 25 degrees and you get an effective cutting angle of 50 degrees. So the effective blade angle of the HNT Gordon is actually lower than the Clifton!

Derek,
I'm not sure if I agree about the blade angle (pitch) of a HNT Gordon plane being lower than that of a Clifton. From what I can work out (using an article from Australian Wood Review 39), the blade angle or pitch of the HNT plane is 60deg, this also matches the bed angle because the blade is mounted bevel down the same as normal stanley plane (45deg).
The blade angle (pitch) of the Clifton with a 25deg bevel facing up will be 50deg, 25deg (bed angle) + 25deg (bevel angle).
The cutting angle for each plane is the blade angle or pitch subtracted from 90deg, eg HNT=30deg, Clifton=40deg, scraper=0deg. Like you say, the lower pitch plane should be more suited to end grain work (or really soft woods), which would mean that the Clifton comes out on top. But then I can't complain about the performance of a HNT Gordon plane on end grain either.

[derekcohen]

Dan

I've been thinking about this and agree with you. The blade pitch for a bevel down blade is the angle of the blade. For the Gordon it will be 60 degrees. However, for the Clifton, with bevel up, the blade pitch is additive, so it is 25 degrees + 25 degrees = 50 degrees.

The question is, "how does the HNT Gordon shoulder plane do such a great job on end grain with such a high blade pitch?!"

Col, we need a review from you cutting jarrah end grain shoulders.

Regards from Perth

Derek

[Dan]

The question is, "how does the HNT Gordon shoulder plane do such a great job on end grain with such a high blade pitch?!"

Don't know Derek.
I didn't realise a one piece shaving could be taken from end grain until I saw the Gordon planes demonstrated at a wood show a few years back. Thats when I decided they were the way to go and I haven't regretted it.
I suppose given that a higher blade angle works better on "curly" grain (a mixture of end grain, straight grain and everything in between), their performance on end grain shouldn't be unexpected. There's always a trade off though, and in this case it will be more effort required to push the plane. In the magazine article I mentioned it says any blade angle from 35-60deg will be ok for end grain work, the important factors being a sharp blade set fine and a bevel of less than 30deg.

Dan

[Driver]

Col we need a review from you cutting jarrah end grain shoulders

Watch this space!

I'll give it a go on the weekend and let you know.

Col

[Driver]

OK – here’s the review of the HNT Gordon ¾ inch Shoulder Plane. (In several separate posts so that I can include some photos).

First, the plane itself. (See photo below). It has an Ironwood body set in a brass sole. As I said in an earlier post, it was honed to a pretty high standard when I unwrapped it and cut a transparent shaving straight out of the box. That initial test was very basic. I just set the blade to cut fine and pushed it across the edge of a piece of 19 mm jarrah – with the grain.

So the first job was to tune the plane. The blade is a spade shape and sits in the plane at a bed angle of 60° (for an explanation of the various angles: I’m using the terminology from Terry Gordon’s excellent article in Issue 39 of AWR – referred to in Dan’s earlier post). The blade is secured in position with a hardwood wedge. To remove the blade, you tap the rear of the plane with a mallet, ease out the wedge and the blade then slides out, through the gap in the sole.

[Driver]

I honed the back of the blade first, using the scary sharp method with sandpaper on glass, working through grits of 280, 400, 600, 800, 1200 and finally 2000 to produce the highly desirable mirror finish.

I then honed the bevel. The blade has a primary bevel of 30°. I decided to give it a micro-bevel at 31°. I did this using a Veritas® Honing Guide – setting the blade at the primary bevel of 30° then adjusting the cam to add 1°. Again I used the scary sharp method – working through the same sequence of grits.

This means that the plane now had a bed angle of 60°; a cutting angle of 30°; a bevel (sharpness) angle of 31° (actually, according to the instructions that came with the honing guide it’s 31¼° but let’s not get too picky); and a clearance angle (between the micro bevel and the horizontal) of 28¾° (call it 29°).

Once I was happy with the result of all the scary sharp activity, I re-set the blade into the plane body. The plane is packaged with a small hardwood setting block and a very simple, clear set of instructions. After a bit of fiddling about (I’m gaining confidence with wooden planes and wedges!), I managed to set it to cut a fine shaving.

[Driver]

Now for the actual testing of the plane’s ability to cut jarrah end grain shoulders. I should say from the start that this is by no means an exhaustive test. My excuse is the weather. It’s bloody hot in Perth this weekend. However, I reckon I’ve done enough to give the shoulder plane a decent workout.

I used jarrah exclusively. Taking a bunch of off-cuts, I cut shoulders into the ends of about 7 or 8 pieces. The thinnest is about 12 mm thick and the thickest about 35 mm. To cut the shoulders, I used a Japanese Z backsaw, cutting a fine kerf. The cuts were made freehand. The photos below show the results of two of the test pieces.

This photo shows the 12 mm piece immediately after the shoulder was cut with the saw. Note in particular the thin line of excess material where the horizontal and vertical cuts intersect.

[Driver]

This photo shows the same piece after a pass across both end-grain and cross-grain with the shoulder plane. The excess material is gone. However, the plane has torn the fibres in the cross-grain cut and caused a bit of tear-out at the end of the cross-grain cut – the end nearest the camera. This was the worst result of all the pieces I tested. It was also the first. I learnt to take it easy when cutting cross-grain.

[Driver]

This photo shows a 35 mm piece after the initial saw cuts. Again, note the excess material at the LH end of the intersection point and the saw marks in the cross-grain face.

[Driver]

This photo shows the same piece after a pass across both faces with the shoulder plane. Clean as a whistle! This was the last of the test pieces.

[Driver]

In summary: the plane is easy to use, even for a rank amateur like me. Cutting end grain shoulders in jarrah was interesting work. The plane cuts beautifully but, because it is set at a high bed angle, you have to use a bit of controlled effort. The key word here is controlled. The plane’s simple design makes it equally simple to find a comfortable grip. For me, this entailed placing the back of the plane in the palm of my right hand, forefinger along the top, thumb on the left side and the other three fingers curled against the right side. I use my left hand to guide the front of the plane against the shoulder of the cut.

I learnt early in the exercise, as Photo 2 demonstrates, that cutting cross-grain means even more control is required. Tear-out is easy to achieve and not just at the end of the cut. Too much force allows the blade to jerk and the resultant savagery will make a mess of the fibres. Photo 4 demonstrates that a sustained but controlled pressure, keeping the plane tight into the shoulder of the cut, will eliminate the problem.

I said in an earlier post that I didn’t anticipate being disappointed with the choice of Terry Gordon’s shoulder plane. Having now given it a thorough workout, I’m delighted to tell you that I’m not a bit disappointed. It’s an excellent tool that does its job very well.

Your correspondent is now open for your comments, questions and criticisms.

Regards

Col

[derekcohen]

Col

Let me be the first to say what a stirling job you've done, particularly on such a hot day. Bloody Hell, no wind to go windsurfing and I've dripped puddles all over the workshop.

But I digress. What I am unsure about is whether you cut both shoulder and cheek, or just cheek. I can see that you obtained a clean cut across the grain on the cheek. Frankly, this is not much of a test of a shoulder plane (infact is not even the real task of a shoulder plane. For example, it can be done with a chisel or a Stanley #140, a skew rabbit block plane).

Did you cut the shoulder, that is, cut the end grain? THAT would test the metal of this plane since it is more easily accomplished with a blade with a low angle bed.

Best regards

Derek

p.s. still waiting for a beer.

[Driver]

Derek

Sorry - I thought I'd made that clear. I cut both the cheek and the shoulder on every test piece.

I reality, of course, the shoulder of a tenon may not need to be planed, even if cut by hand (with a fine kerf saw). However, I'm assuming that I will use this plane to creep up to an exact dimension on tenon shoulders when I'm making fine adjustments.

Anyway, yes - I did use it to cut end grain on the shoulders. Having looked again at the photos, I can see why you questioned me. It's not too obvious because of the angle of the first two shots. In fact, the excess material showing at the intersection point in the first photo was removed by a pass across the end grain of the shoulder. I only cut across the cheek as an afterthought (and made a mess of it, as you can see!).

Mate - that beer is becoming more urgent with the rising temperature! I'll give you a call this week.

Regards

Col

[Rocker]

As a fully paid-up member of the Norm faction of the woodworking community, I am not sure if I should be commenting in this thread, since, as I said in my previous post, I would contend that a shoulder plane is an unnecessary tool. However, I think that, if you are going to get a shoulder plane, the way to go is to get a low-angled one with a blade adjustment system, like the Veritas medium shoulder plane. Unfortunately, Lee Valley have just raised the price by US$40 to US$179, but, before that, it seemed pretty good value. I still maintain, though, that the best way of trimming a tenon's cheeks is with a chisel, and that a tenon's shoulders should not need trimming at all, unless you insist on cutting them with a hand saw.

I know that some people get pleasure from spending time tapping the back of their plane with a hammer, and acquiring the skill to know just how hard to tap it to set the blade, but I am afraid I am not one of them. Nevertheless, it is good to see that the Gordon planes have achieved world-wide renown amongst plane aficionados.

[Driver]

Rocker

Your opinion, like your obvious ability, commands respect.

As Cyrano de Bergerac might have said: there's more than one way to skin a cat!

Regards

Col

[derekcohen]

Rocker wrote:


I would contend that a shoulder plane is an unnecessary tool.

Rocker, I simply cannot agree with you. In the Real World, woodworkers fine tune their work to fit or just to correct an error. I do this all the time (if I am an expert at anything, it is in repairing my mistakes). I contend that if we aim to hit Perfection on the first attempt, and accept nothing less, then not many of us would even bother to try. Again, I am the foremost example of this law.

Jigs are designed to reduce error by guiding the cut, and I'm sure that your tenon jig is top notch, but I cannot imagine that you get an exact fit every time (having said that, I'm sure you can, but the effort and manner involved is not for the likes of me. To use a micrometer to gauge exactness is not my cup of tea, although I recognise that some enjoy this form of woodworking). So in the Real World we need Tools to aid in the cutting of tenons. The shoulders are the most important part of the tenon since this is what shows - look at Frank Krausz' video and listen to his discussion on this point. Chisels do not cut it freehand when adjusting tenon shoulders (pun intended). They are fine for tenon cheeks, however.

There is another factor. Using a plane, such as the HNT Gordon, brings me out in goosebumps. Gad, I'd create a minor error, if this was what it takes, JUST for the opportunity to use one. Your suggestion of the Veritas medium shoulder plane is a good one. This plane has a superior reputation on USA websites. It has the ability to be adjusted in every possible way. Like a micrometer. But I would not buy one - because it looks like Sci-Fi nightmare. I would not trade user-friendliness for traditionalism in this situation. The HNT Gordon planes are Art. That's why Col chose his: "form following function to good effect". I am going to buy one, and I'm sure that I will wet myself every time I use it!

Regards from Perth

Derek

[Rocker]

Derek,

Fortunately the woodworking community is a broad church, whose members derive their pleasure from different aspects of the craft. I get my kicks from achieving accuracy in an enviroment where many factors make that goal difficult to reach. However, there are limits - I doubt if I would get much satisfaction from working with a computer-controlled routing machine. I think you get your kicks from mastering tools that require a fair amount of expertise to use, whereas I just get frustrated trying to get any worthwhile results from using a tool like a spokeshave or a draw-knife; I would rather use a compass-plane or a router, and save myself the humiliation of repeated failure.

I think I belong to the school of thought which does not hold with the saying that it is better to travel than to arrive. Thus, my main satisfaction in woodworking is with the finished product, rather than in the actual process of making the product. So I prefer to go for the most efficient tools, rather than the most challenging ones.

Having said all this, I must admit, that, if money were no object, I would be happy to buy a Veritas shoulder plane, which seems to me the most efficient tool for the job, but it just doesn't feature very high on my list. You, on the other hand, are happy to spurn the efficient tool in favour of the aesthetically pleasing one which can produce good results if you have the persistence to master it. That is a fair enough point of view, and Gordon planes have found a lucrative niche market among woodworkers who subscribe to it.

[silentC]

You blokes are going to just have to agree to disagree. This argument will come up time and time again and there is no resolution.

Isn't woodworking such a fantastic recreation? There can't be too many occupations around that have such a broad range of entry points and that cater for so many differing points of view and personal philosophies.

I built an electric guitar once, much of it lovingly crafted by hand using spokeshaves, hand scrapers and chisels. It took weeks. A mate saw what I was doing and raced off and built his own. His was done with power tools in a weekend. It was very clean compared to mine, which had lumps and bumps and mistakes all over it. An old bloke that I had met along the way had shown me how to fix mistakes, and how to use a cabinet scraper to shape the finger board. But despite that, although I was envious of my mate's skill, I liked mine better because it 'looked' hand made. More importantly I had enjoyed the process of making it. I don't even know where it is any more.

I'm somewhere in the middle at the moment. I'm envious of those who can do such accurate work that a micrometer has any use: I'm happy to be within a millimetre or two. At the same time, I wish I could get better results with my hand saws, planes and chisels. At the moment, machinery is the best chance that I've got of getting good results - but one day...

[derekcohen]

Rocker

My only disagreement with the things you say is that you tend to push your point of view and negate any other. We actually agree more than we disagree - the fact that I do not subscribe to the extent that you subscribe to them does not mean that I can't identify with your perspective (if all that makes sense!). I do use, and have frequently offered advice in, powered tools and powered tool jigs (for example, that long, long thread on router tables at short while ago). I try not to advocate a singular strategy (e.g. power vs hand) for someone as if it were the only way. While everyone knows my affiliation for hand tools, I do not attempt to persuade all that this is the only way to fly (because I use as many powered tools as anyone else). Of course, when somreone raises a question about handtools, well then my enthusiasm certainly comes to the fore!

I welcome your advice and insights about jigs because I think that you have something worthwhile to offer here. I also think that you know a little more about hand tools than you let on:).

I guess that I am writing this because I do not want you or anyone on this forum to think that we have some kind of feud. There is certainly nothing like this from my side.

Regards from Perth

Derek

[Rocker]

Derek,
I am sorry if I have sounded excessively combative in this discussion. Certainly, I have no intention of feuding. I respect your knowledge and expertise in the use of hand tools; I suppose I am sometimes tempted to play the role of devil's advocate too vigorously. I agree with Driver that there are many ways to skin a cat, and, as Darren suggests, I am happy to agree to disagree. There is a fine line between putting one's point of view cogently, and seeming to disrespect the opposing point of view. Perhaps I have inadvertently overstepped it.

Rocker

[Driver]

Rocker and Derek

Let's not get too sensitive here, fellas! This is Australia where a robustly-expressed viewpoint is, and should be, a matter of pride. The type of discussion that this thread contains is nothing but a good thing.

Speaking personally, I've learnt a helluva lot from both of you. If you were to worry too much about treading on each other's feelings, you might not be so articulate and the quality of your advice would be adversely affected.

Keep it up!

Regards

Col

[DaveInOz]

This is all so sweet and touchy - feely, I might cry, its just special.:rolleyes:

Geez lads - get in there with your boots and sort it out, let me know the best method when your finished.

What is this bloody Martha Stewart does joinery?



... I'll get me coat.

[derekcohen]

Dave

Any more from you and I'll send my mate, Rocker, over to sort you out.

Regards from Perth

Derek:D

[Wood Borer]

I think the discussion between Rocker and Derek is great especially for people new to woodwork who may not have considered all facets of woodwork.

Perhaps this is similar to going to Birdsville.

Fantastic experience driving up the Track taking in the landscape, negotiating the sandhills and watching the sun go down whilst washing the dust from your throat with a beer or two.

At the end of the track you are rewarded with a cold beer or two and a good meal with the locals in one of the best pubs in Australia.

In other words, I get a lot of satisfaction designing, making, finishing and then admiring the final product.

Some people might choose to fly to Birdsville, have one beer and fly out again without experiencing the track or the locals (CNC machines).

Others might take an airconditioned coach (sophisticated floor mounted machines with jigs)

Me - I set up my own tent, cook my own meal and chill and drink my own beer (handtools).

Who is right and who is wrong? Who got to the pub in the least time? Was getting to the pub the objective?

They are all OK and are all rewarded accordingly.


- Wood Borer

[Rocker]

I have just realized that I gave some erroneous information in an earlier post about the price of the Veritas shoulder plane. Its price has not been raised, as I mistakenly said. It is still US$139. As such, I think it is outstanding value. The confusion arose because the Lee Valley website quotes prices in either Canadian dollars or US dollars - you choose. I had seen the Canadian dollar price, and thought then that it was the US dollar price.

[Wood Borer]

Rocker,

I can see you are about to purchase one of these wonderful shoulder planes and throw away those noisey dusty machines! - Just joking.

On a more serious note, on the weekend I was making a large gate with mortise and tenon joints and I was trimming the tenons with my shoulder plane (listening to the radio) after roughing them out with my radial arm saw and chisels.

The pieces with the tenons were quite long (2.1m) and I wondered if it was possible to use a jig on a table saw with pieces that long. It was the height clearance to the roof that I envisaged could be a problem in a low shed.

You see, now you have hand tool people thinking about your jigs in a positive way.

- Wood Borer

[Rocker]

Wood Borer,

I must admit I am tempted by the Veritas shoulder plane, vile though it is in Derek's eyes:)

With regard to tenons on long boards, I think the easiest way is to use a floating tenon. I clamp long boards vertically in my bench vice, clamp my morticing jig to the top of the board; then stand on my workbench to rout a mortice in the end of the board to take a floating tenon. For my morticing jig, see

http://www.woodworkforums.ubeaut.com.au/showthread.php?s=&threadid=5633&highlight=Mortising+jig

I would not attempt to cut a tenon on a board longer than about 700 mm on a table-saw tenoning jig.

Rocker

[derekcohen]

Rocker

You should get the Veritas shoulder plane. I have heard nothing but fantastic reports about it. I'm not critical of the plane, per se, just that I do not like its looks - I prefer something more traditional. In fact, I did purchase the HNT Gordon plane and I think it is a work of art. Every time I hold it I feel a million Dollars. It works well too - it has all the finer adjustments of the Veritas but these are made with a hammer rather than a knob.

I know you like precision. So do I, even though I choose to use tools that are tuned by the eye and hand rather than a micrometer. You would been impressed watching me dimension boards this past weekend. I do not have a power jointer or planer, and dimension everything by handplane. I was using recycled Jarrah floorboards - old, rough and worn. My new HNT Gordon Try Plane is just amazing. Its ability to flatten a board is simply in a class of its own. Previously I used a Stanley #7 with a laminated Japanese blade. So there I was, planing and measuring with a set of digital vernier calipers, Starrett straight edge and combination square, and Veritas saddle square. Edges are squared on a shooting board. Boards are joined (to form wide boards) with dowels (using 100 year old Stanley #59 jig - The Best!) because, which they are much more fiddly than biscuits, biscuits are not precise enough (move too much). The result is invisible glue lines.

The downside to this approach is time. It takes a long time. But the pleasure is equally in the journey. It makes the end product that much more special for me (I will hopefully finish the bedside tables I am busy on this coming weekend and upload pictures of these and the Mission bed I have built. Just one more drawer with handcut half-blind dovetails to complete).

Go on, get the Veritas shoulder plane. You know you want it.

Regards from Perth

Derek

[Rocker]

Derek,

You are right to remind us of the physical and mental pleasures of using traditional hand tools. My problem is that, at this time of year, my workshop is so hot that I drip sweat putting boards through the planer. I would dissolve into a pool of grease if I had to plane them by hand.

You make that shoulder plane sound so romantically tempting that perhaps I should get it for my wife for her anniversary present. Only trouble is, her hobby is genealogy:)

Rocker

[craigb]

As a matter of interest, any idea what the cost of the shipping on the Veritas plane would be?

The website says it weighs 2 pounds.

Do Lee Valley have the option of surface mail or do they just air mail their stuff?

Just interested on what the total cost to your door woud be.

Craig

[Rocker]

CraigB

As it happens, I ordered a consignment yesterday from Lee Valley which should weigh about two pounds. They are going to ship it to me by surface mail for US$22.

If you order stuff from overseas, remember to ensure that each consignment falls below the customs duty threshold (I think about US$250, but check with Customs).

[craigb]

Thanks for that.

So about $215 to your door for the shoulder plane if my maths is correct.

Seems to compare very favourably to the price of the Lie Neilson and Clifton offerings.

[DaveInOz]

FWIW
I picked up a Stanley UK #90 from Working tools at Salamanca market (http://www.workingtools.com.au/index.php) for $200 in near perfect condition.

I need to find out how to sharpen it properly and how to plane 5mm shoulders that are 20mm long :confused: :confused: on jarrah and merbau. That aside I assume it will do a good job

2 more of these are available in fix up condition for $150 from Hans Brunner (http://www.hansbrunnertools.gil.com.au/) I believe they are both Stanley USA

Now I just need to figure out how to use it before it becomes an expensive paper weight;)

[Wood Borer]

Dave,

from what I can see this is similar to the shoulder planes discussed above.

What problems are you having with the sharpening?


- Wood Borer

[derekcohen]

Craig

Avoid surface mail if you can. It takes about 3 months. It does not cost more to send it standard UPS, which takes about 3 weeks.

Dave

The good and bad news, THe #90 is not a shoulder plane. It is a bullnose plane. It is not designed to trim shoulders or cheeks of M and T joints. The good news is that it is a fine plane, very versatile - it can also be used as a chisel plane (by removing the nose).

Regards from Perth

Derek

[DaveInOz]

Derek

Is it useable as a shoulder plane? or am I just going to frustrate myself trying?

[derekcohen]

Dave

Yes, you can use it. The problem is only in making a cut where you benefit from a nose to steady the plane and ensure a flat cut. Think of the difference between a jointer (or try) plane, such as a Stanley #7, and a smoother, a Stanley #4. The #7 has the advantage of a long surface area and this ensures that you only cut the highs on the board. The #4 has a shorter base and will follow the actual surface more closely. Both smooth the timber but only the #7 really flattens it.

In a similar way, the #90 will cut like the #4, while a dedicated shoulder plane (such as a #93) will cut flat since it has a longer base.

The #93 is identical to the #90 in all respects except for the nose, which is about 2" long.

Regards from Perth

Derek

[DaveInOz]

Derek,

Ok, given I have a bull nose plane what the hell do you use them for.
and secondly can you get the nose on the 93 to fit the 90 so you would effectively have 2 planes!!

Thanks for your help

[derekcohen]

Dave

A bullnose plane is used to get close up, that is, plane as far to the edge of a "wall" as possible with a fully supported blade. If you remove the nose you have a chisel plane. But this does not control the fineness of cut, which is done when you adjust the mouth (as on any plane). A bullnose has the shortest nose of any plane (other than a chariot plane) while still having a mouth.

What is also special about a bullnose plane is that it can be used as a shoulder plane since the blade extends flush with the sides.

Regarding the nose of the #93 fitting - yes, it will do so, and perfectly. But you would be hard pressed to find one that is an orphan. Hen's teeth!

Regards from Perth

Derek

[DaveInOz]

OH I see.

Good.

Hooray / Bugger

thanks for the info Derek

[woodhog]

I simply want tight & great looking tenons without spending huge amounts of time & money. So far I have great luck cuting tenons using my radial arm saw 60T - 80T carbide blade with a stop block on the fence. The table must be absolutely flat I started off with fresh particle board & square to the blade. Boards 4" wide & narrower are best as far as accuracy are concerned.

[outback]

:wtf1: :postwhore:

[Poppa]

Well I'm glad that this thread has been resurrected. I've been thinking on a shoulder plane lately, as it is the next type of plane I'd like to add to my collection. I've been hoping to pick up one of the combination planes, that will give me a shoulder/bullnose/chisel plane in one. My family and I do a lot of auctions and garage sales so that's where I'm hoping to get one.

[derekcohen]

Poppa

In view of the fact that my last comments (above) were written 2 years ago, and that I have no desire to re-read the thread to check the context of the advice, let me say this ..

Cutting the shoulders of a rebate/rabbet is fine with a bullnose plane such as the Stanley #90 since it is registering against the side. However, the #90 is a no-no to plane the shoulders of a mortice and tenon joint. It simply lack the registration at the nose to begin the cut correctly. Some might argue that they use it by planing from the centre of the the tenon outwards, but this will create a big risk of breaking out a side.

The chances of finding a bullnose/chisel/shoulder plane in one are very rare. It is more common to get 2-in-one than three-in-one. For example, either the Stanley #90 as a bullnose/chisel plane, or a Stanley #92 or #93 as a shoulder/chisel plane.

Keep an eye out for a Record #311. I think that is what you want. Here is an example (courtesy of Google):

http://cgi.ebay.com/Record-rabbet-plane-311-and-bullnose-excellent_W0QQitemZ140068075316QQihZ004QQcategoryZ13874QQcmdZViewItem

Regards from Perth

Derek

[Poppa]

Thanks Derek, I appreciate your (as always) invaluable advice. I realise that it might take me a while to acquire the object of my desire, but I am patient and have time. And of course, if I pick up something in the meantime that will suffice without being the exact thing, then I'll have something else to fettle and tune, which keeps me happily busy.

I'd love to buy one of the high end brands shoulder planes, but that just isn't an option at the moment, so I'll just keep my eyes open and see what I can find.

[sinjin]

What about one of these..
http://www.lie-nielsen.com/catalog.php?grp=1274

[mat]

Sinjin

Good for the cheeks but no good for shoulders, unless you get the L and R versions.

[Poppa]

As well as that, while I appreciate the beauty and value of LN planes, I just can't afford them at the moment. Most of my planes came to me free, or were cheap pick ups. Then I restore them and use them as best I can. Some day a shoulder plane will find its way to me.

[woodhog]

I just purchased my Clifton 3110 3 in 1 shoulder plane. At $209 on sale its a great value.
The sale price timing was perfect. I helped my father in law with some odd jobs at $75 a day.
I finally had extra cash to go with the $100 dollar bill my mother in law gave me for christmas. Whew!
Approx 6 1/8" long assembled 2 1/2 lbs 1 1/8" width.
The Cliftons 3110 squirrell shaped tail is shorter & more comfortable than another shoulder plane with a bronze handle. Personal taste.
The paint was a bit thin making it look a tiny bit ugly & maybe prone to rust. This is still a great plane despite its paint.
So I applied my own black rust preventative paint to these areas using a 1/16" artist brush.
Gave the threads some oil & whala!
Yes it really a 3 in 1 shoulder plane.
All of the parts are numbered & machined to fit together perfectly.
The machining is good quality, smooth & square to sides ect. The threads are cut well & knurling on steel adjusters is a nice touch & more durable in my opinion.
It makes newspaper thin shavings across grain in maple right out of the box.
Its excellent when compared a #92 or #93 in terms of overall quality.
Now I just laugh when I see the #92 & #93 shoulder planes at the store.
I think another Mfg. makes a better looking plane with bronze parts & excellent machining accuracy.
My personal opinion,taste & needs. Their shoulder planes were too heavy for their width & length. They were too heavy for me to hold/grip comfortably & maintain control of the display model shoulder plane.
The bronze squirrell tail shaped handle is longer than Clifton 3110 & difficult for me as an individual to hold well.
Both of the planes I compared will do excellent.
Simply choose the one that fits your hand & needs for width & length & weight.