Thread: Repairing nick in hand plane throat

Dengy,
Looks like that plane found some old nails or screws. If the nicks are not making marks in the wood being planed I would live with it. I have never had to fix a problem like that on any of my old planes but I would not be taking a file to it unless it was necessary. See what some others think.
Regards
John

I wouldn't touch it either. Shouldn't affect the quality of the cut.
I agree with John, don't file the mouth.

You have to ask yourself what will you achieve
Will it improve the way the plane cuts
Can you be 100% sure you wont damage the landing for the blade and reduce the planes cutting ability

The only reason I can see is a cosmetic one and that wouldn't be enough reason for me with a possible bad rersult

Dengue every time you look at the sole it will remind you of your grandfather and give you an opportunity to think about how it happened.

here is a bedrock type study

we would need to see the lever cap, blade and size of the brass wheel to confirm but its likely that it was made between 1911 and 1923. Its either a type 5 or one of the type 6's.

Many thanks for the kind and wise words above. I suppose I was just looking at it from an aesthetic point of view, but agree that it is a risky venture and un-necessary. I particularly like PacMan's last comment about bringing the memory back - thanks for that

The brass wheel is roughly 25mm diameter maximum, no more. The lever cap is plain, no stamping or casting on it, and the original blade would have been long gone. This plane looks like it has had a hard life.

From the info in the link, I expect it was a type 5 or a type 6.

My next problem is to find a 2" wide cap lever which has the names embossed on it. (see attached pics)


Bedrock cap lever_2.jpg


Bedrock cap lever_1.jpg

Nice family heirloom to restore!

Thanks Joe, I am getting it ready for use, will eventually pass to my eldest son who is into woodwork too, but is not too careful with his tools leaving them lying around to rust. Need to educate him further

How about a photo of the lever cap that is on it?

Hi Pacman, the existing lever cap has no markings whatsoever, but it is a key hole and not a kidney shape.

Hi Pacman, here is the photo of the lever cap on the plane.

You can also see the blade of the plane - that would not be an original, would it?
605 plane (Large).jpg


605 blade (Large).jpg

That blade looks quite new to me. Not sure when they switched to those rounded corners, but I'm pretty sure it was after the 1960s.

Like others I wouldn't bother doing anything to the nick, it's behind the blade, I would give due consideration to flattening the sole by scraping tho, get the boy to do it, maybe he might look after it then



Pete

+1 for "forgeddaboudit". I have a small rebate plane with a relatively huge chip behind the blade - makes no difference whatsoever. It may be a good idea to very slightly dull the edges of the nick just so there's nothing sharp (although in theory, even that shouldn't matter).

Patrick's Blood and Gore is a lengthy treatise on all planes Stanley - and I mean all. It's been written by a true Stanley plane geek with a comprehensive if not exhaustive knowledge on every Stanley plane release and model.

I have an old 604 plane with similar patent dates, which places the production dates for them both between the wars.

I don't recommend doing much in the way of restoration. The nicks, marks and scratches are known in the second hand trade as "patina', or the telltales of an original, historic object that has seen extensive use as intended by both the maker and end user. To remove said patina is not restoration, but renewal.

The blade is indeed not original. It's a more contemporary English replacement, presumably because the original had been worn out. It probably requires sharpening. Does the cap iron meet the blade with no discernable gaps near the cutting edge? If so, then leave well enough alone. If not then a very careful light dressing at the acute angle of meeting is in order. Is the blade tight in the mouth, and is the frog sitting properly without rocking on both the sole and against the blade?

Is the sole tried and true, meaning is it @ right angles to the sides and is there any twist in the sole (determined with winding sticks)? Are there any substantial high spots in the sole longitudinally and laterally? I'd guess not, as it was obviously used by a craftsman who used his tools to make his living, and as such would undoubtedly have been used and maintained appropriately.

A No.5 plane, by it's very nature, is a fairly rough user's tool. By that I mean that it's the first recommended plane purchase for users. It's primary use is as a roughing plane, used to flatten the surface of boards by being used initially diagonally and then with the grain. Final finishing work was then undertaken with a shorter soled No.4, 4 1/2 or 3 Smoothing plane. The No. 5 is known as a "Try" plane, meaning as indicated above that it's intended purpose is for flattening and shaping, or trying a board.

There's a lot of ballyhoo regarding planes in my opinion. The Stanley Bedrock series are regarded somewhat reverentially by plane collectors by virtue of their rarity. Certainly they were produced in Stanley's "golden age" of production between the wars, but were ultimately a commercial failure as evidenced by their rarity. Put into perspective, however, they are certainly superior in design and construction to Stanley's postwar designs, and to anything produced by Stanley in England. However, they pale in comparison to the high-tech metallurgy, computer aided design and CNC milling of contemporary products from the like of Clifton and Leigh Nielsen.

Clean up the rust with a stainless steel pot scourer, sharpen her up and away you go. While your plane isn't necessarily valuable, I'm sure it's historical connections make it immeasurably valuable as an heirloom user.