Thread: The Marcou S15/BU Smoother - Reviewed

Derek,

congratulations on the write-up, very well written and balanced.

I look at these premium tools and am glad they exist, but not for me. When they get that expensive they enter another realm which I can't justify for practical woodworking; not when the LVs and LNs probably are at the upper limit of bang per buck. That is not to say I wouldn't love to use or own one (preferably both), but I think for the price of a set of these style planes I could outfit the workshop.

One thing I haven't seen written about with these smoothers, and Derek rightly commented on, is
"how would it hold up under work conditions?"

To those who can afford them, best of luck to you, I'm envious.

Again Derek, great article.

Derek,

Congratulations, again, on a superb assessment of an apparently superb tool.

Of particular interest was how close the Marcou plane came to the LV BUS - or should that be the other way around?

This gives me added impetus to do some more work to complete the Shepherd infill (Spiers #7 Smoother replica) kit that I recently received from the now-defunct Shepherd Tool Company.

Now if I can make this kit look and, at least partially, emulate Philip's work-of-art plane I shall be a very happy chappy indeed!

Great review, Derek, sounds a very desireable plane

The BUS is sounding better & better though...

Thanks for posting.


Cheers..............Sean

Really interesting review Derek - I liked the direct comparisons and the extra opinions touch - gives a lot more perspective than the more usual blurb on a single tool bty a lone voice.

Just a nit-pick. I think you mean "Exquisitely crafted" (page 1)

And are you SURE that's rock (sugar) maple (Acer saccharum)?? It looks like no piece of rock maple I've ever seen, but may be just the picture quality. The rock maple I look at every day (my bench top) is a bland cream colour, with fine milk-chocalate lines, and almost invisible grain. And a b*gger of a wood to handplane - very dulling to the best of blades.

None of which detracts from the review!!

Great review, love the depth you've gone into! Real wood , and what an incredible tool!

Cheers,

Hi Ian

In reality the Maple is light coloured and bland looking. The pictures highlight different shades and tones (probably reflecting the different grain directions), which is why it looks atypical.

Regards from Perth

Derek

Hi Derek - yeah, ok - I thought it could be the picture, but the B'wood and Jarrah look quite normal. I find with my camera I have to overexpose by a stop or two when taking pics of mostly white(ish) subjects or they come out grey and underexposed as the light metering tries to cope with something its tiny brain doesn't comprehend.

It's pretty hard to mistake the (hard) Maples for anything else (given the provenence is accurate - there may well be other species I've not seen that could be confused!) And before someone from Nth America chimes in, yes, I'm aware there are at least two species known as Rock Maple (A saccharum and A. nigrum or (Guess what?) "Black" Maple. And also that the 'soft' maples do look a bit different, particularly ones like A. nigundo (Box Elder in the U.S. or Manitoba Maple in Canja).

Just letting you know I read the post!!!

Avagooday,

Originally Posted by derekcohen

Hi Ian

In reality the Maple is light coloured and bland looking. The pictures highlight different shades and tones (probably reflecting the different grain directions), which is why it looks atypical.

Regards from Perth

Derek

Missed an opportunity here, Derek Ian, the pics are a bit misleading due to the maple's chatoyance, mate


Cheers................Sean

Hi Derek,

The way you're going with these great reviews and tool we will all start getting into trouble with SWMBO.

Have mercy .

Personally I'm starting to use this one "...if it wasn't for that Derek guy honey, I wouldn't have known about this plane that I HAVE to have... its all HIS fault".

Thats my story and Im sticking to it

Thanks for another great review.

regards,

Marios

Lovely looking tools. You must be enjoying it immensely.

Derek, I wish I new more about them, so I could give you a decent conversation.

Originally Posted by scooter

Missed an opportunity here, Derek Ian, the pics are a bit misleading due to the maple's chatoyance, mate
Cheers................Sean

Actually, I was going to be the smart*rse and chide him for mis-spelling, but I did a check first, and it seems the word has been Anglicised to the point where most English dictionaries spell it with a single 't' - my high-school French teacher is no doubt turning in her grave.

Just for those of you not familiar with the word, here's how the Encyclopedia Britannica defines it:
Chatoyance (or chattoyance!): The property of some minerals to exhibit a wavy, luminous band with a silky lustre, reminiscent of the eye of a cat, in the centre of a cabochon-cut (polished, with a rounded, unfaceted convex surface) stone. The effect, caused by parallel fibres or by oriented imperfections or inclusions within the stone, is typical of cat's-eye, tigereye, satin spar, and bronzite. The fibres, imperfections, or inclusions are oriented along a crystallographic axis; it is this same kind of orientation, but along three axes, that accounts for the asterism of star sapphire and ruby.

There, I hope everyone feels much better now.

Actually, it is a very useful word, we don't have any other word that captures the property so wel. It even sounds right - you get the feeling of the light chattering off the surface.

OK, back to the real thread...............

Onya Ian, yer French teacher would be proud of your quest


Cheers...................Sean

Originally Posted by IanW

- my high-school French teacher is no doubt turning in her grave.

That's unlikely, Ian. The word hasn't been Anglicised (unless it is spelt with a double t). It is actually taken directly from the French verb 'chatoyer' - to shimmer. Chatoyance is pronounced with a soft 'ch' - like 'sh' - as it would be in French. (Source - Macquarie Dictionary).

Just to be really anal about it, etymologically it is a combination of two French words: 'chat' - cat and 'oeuil' - eye, hence cat's eye, as Britannica states.

OK - that's enough half-@rsed scholarship. Back to the woodwork.

Col

Originally Posted by Driver

OK - that's enough half-@rsed scholarship. Back to the woodwork.
Col

The erudition round here is just too much. OK, Driver, I concede - I typed 'Chattoyance' into google the first time and and got the definition. Somehow the double t looked right, but you are quite right to point out that the etymology would indicate a single t. Every time I try to be a smart*rse, I end up with egg all over!

Serves me right for thread-jacking.
OK Derek, now you can really have your thread back........