Thread: Where to buy thick plane blades

Jim Davey would be the best to talk to about this

Dengy, all of the after-market blades like Hock, LV and LN, are thicker than original Stanleys. I'm not sure about the IBC blades Jim Davey sells, but they are most likely thicker, too (I just looked, & he doesn't tell us what thicknesses they are on his website), but I'm sure an email to him would soon sort it out. However, none of them may be thick enough to close up a large mouth significantly, so if you are set on a super-fine mouth, you may need to search further.

Personally, I find the emphasis on fine mouths to be a bit mis-directed, on Bailey type planes. You are stuck with certain geometries like the blade angle, which often has more bearing on performance than a fine mouth in many difficult woods, in my experience. Remember too, that you can only increase the blade thickness so far before the adjuster cam won't engage the cap-iron slot properly, rendering your depth adjuster useless, unless you extend the cam by brazing or silver-soldering a small extension to it. This varies from model to model and can also depend on how much wear has occurred, so you need to check that out on your own plane.

A blade up to ~3.5mm thick will still allow adequate adjuster engagement on most planes I've come across, and that's about what the main makers of after-market blades seem to keep in mind. Having a solid, sharp, & well-bedded blade makes a huge difference to most stock Baileys without any other modifications, and can improve performance on most gnarly woods dramatically.

Just my opinion, others may disagree......

Originally Posted by IanW

Dengy, all of the after-market blades like Hock, LV and LN, are thicker than original Stanleys. I'm not sure about the IBC blades Jim Davey sells, but they are most likely thicker, too (I just looked, & he doesn't tell us what thicknesses they are on his website), but I'm sure an email to him would soon sort it out. However, none of them may be thick enough to close up a large mouth significantly, so if you are set on a super-fine mouth, you may need to search further.

Personally, I find the emphasis on fine mouths to be a bit mis-directed, on Bailey type planes. You are stuck with certain geometries like the blade angle, which often has more bearing on performance than a fine mouth in many difficuly woods, in my experience. Remember too, that you can only increase the blade thickness so far before the adjuster cam won't engage the cap-iron slot properly, rendering your depth adjuster useless, unless you extend the cam by brazing or silver-soldering a small extension to it. This varies from model to model and can also depend on how much wear has occurred, so you need to check that out on your own plane.

A blade up to ~3.5mm thick will still allow adequate adjuster engagement on most planes I've come across, and that's about what the main makers of after-market blades seem to keep in mind. Having a solid, sharp, & well-bedded blade makes a huge difference to most stock Baileys without any other modifications, and can improve performance on most gnarly woods dramatically.

Just my opinion, others may disagree......

I agree with all that Ian has said.
Beware a too-thick blade, it causes more problems than it is worth on Stanley Bailey planes.
The IBC from Jim Davey is a good choice, and from all reports an excellent blade. A2 tool steel
Hardness Rc 60-62
Blade thickness 0.095"
Cryogenically treated



I haven't used one, and my own preference as a replacement is for Hock blades in spite of their odd appearance.
Talk to Jim - he will set you right.
Cheers
SG

Originally Posted by IanW

Dengy, all of the after-market blades like Hock, LV and LN, are thicker than original Stanleys. I'm not sure about the IBC blades Jim Davey sells, but they are most likely thicker, too

Ray Isles blade are 4.0mm - I have them in a 605 and a 608 and there is no adjuster problem.
They were a good price from the UK when I got them.

Interestingly, I just noticed that I have a 4.0mm blade in a #2 ... it is a "Lakeside" a brand of the Montgomery Ward (US) mail-order chain. It's not at all new, but not sure how old.

I only have a #62 blade from IBC. It is 4.2mm ... but I don't know if that carries over to the normal Stanley replacements.

You also have to consider what steel you want for your new blade ... O1, D2, A2, PMV11 ...

You may be able to find a few paragraphs on the forum/internet on the subject

Cheers,
Paul

I've a Hock blade and chipbreaker for the 4 1/2 and 6 and a LN set for the 8. I much prefer the Hock over the LN and yes the matching chipbreaker IMHO improves blade stiffness and performance over the thinner Stanley chipbreakers.

My Record Stay Set set (No 7) is my current favourite for planning Rosewood. It's funny, I sharpen all my bench Planes very similar, to 4000 waterstone, enough for all blades (Stanley, Hock, LN or Record to shave arm hairs) and I still get noticeably differing performance in different woods. The Hock love the Spotty, I was playing with a few months ago.

I'm sure someone out in the WWW has done an objective test on plane blades and their idiosyncrasies, there is too much wood in my sheds to do that sort of stuff

Hi Dengue


Not a lot to add to the good information already posted. If you are determined to get a thick plane blade definitely contact Jim Davey and discuss the IBC/Cosman matched double iron Jim Davey Planes & Sharpening - eShop - Sales - IBC Blades look for the 075-512-50 part number. I have had this combination in a Stanley #3 for aprox 12 months very happy with the performance of the blade (the blade is aprox 3.5 mm thick and the Cosman chip breaker 3 mm thick) However like Scribbly says "Beware a too-thick blade, it causes more problems than it is worth on Stanley Bailey planes" I would agree with this, I had to file aprox .5 mm out of the front of the mouth to allow the blade to slide through the mouth without contacting the the base of the plane (even after sliding the frog back) and the Cosman chip breaker, while very good quality, may not have the slot for the adjuster in exactly the right place for your particular plane (I have to wind the adjuster much further out than another plane).

As an alternative you could get the 075-511-50 blade only (it is closer in thickness to the original blade) and a chip breaker from Ron Hock HOCK TOOLS -- Bench Plane Blades, at least he has detailed drawings showing the dimentions of the chip breaker and the position of the slot for the adjuster (the position of the adjuster slot varies with some Stanley types) or from Henry Eckert (Lie-Nelson Australia) 2 5/8 Improved Chipbreaker.

I have noticed with the A2 blade however when the edge starts to dull it seems to get to a certain point and then deteriorate quickly.

Another consideration would be the Japanese Tsunesaburo laminated blades (using Blue paper steel) if you contact Stuart at Iron plane replacement blades. : Tools from Japan, Japanese woodworking tools direct from Japan.
I purchased a Samurai brand laminated Blue paper steel blade (when they were available in Australia in the late 80's for my #4 and would not part with it for anything) this blade holds a sharp and usable edge much longer than the A2 blade.


As pmcgee says "You also have to consider what steel you want for your new blade ... O1, D2, A2, PMV11 ..." the only thing that I would add is that the PMV11 blades from Lee Valley are not available for Stanley planes yet(?) according to Lee Valley sales and marketing dept as of mid January this year.


The effort required to get an aftermarket blade will be worth while, the Chrome vanadium blades that come with Stanley plane blades are cheap junk by any measure and especially when compared the the quality of blades being discussed in this thread.


good luck
L L WOOD

Originally Posted by pmcgee

Ray Isles blade are 4.0mm - I have them in a 605 and a 608 and there is no adjuster problem.
They were a good price from the UK when I got them.

Paul, you will get away with thicker blades in many cases, but it's worth warning folks, because a problem can certainly occur, I, and plenty of others have exdperienced it. Tolerances seem to have been pretty broad on old planes, so some are fine, others not. Partial engagement of the cam is not good, either, because you will get extra backlash, & many find the 'normal' amount irritating enough.

In the rob cosman matched chipbreaker set the blade is 3.56mm A-2 Tool Steel and the chipbreaker is 3.18mm Thick O-1 Tool Steel

Originally Posted by LL Wood

I purchased a Samurai brand laminated Blue paper steel blade (when they were available in Australia in the late 80's for my #4 and would not part with it for anything) this blade holds a sharp and usable edge much longer than the A2 blade.

Thanks for that info.

The first two iron planes I bought came from an auction at the Wooden Boat Works Fremantle.
I bought a milk-crate with two planes, both english, both plastic handled stanleys ... a #4 and a #5.

The #5 has a 'Samurai' iron which I haven't known anything about ... or looked into before.
They have always worked quite well for me ... once I started finding out how to use them at all.
Looking yesterday, I read "Laminated blade. Made in Japan" under the logo.

Cheers,
Paul

No worries Paul

I hit a nail with that blade once, what a mess . Its ok now though we are back on speaking terms (sort of!!!)

Regards
Stephen

Originally Posted by IanW

Paul, you will get away with thicker blades in many cases, but it's worth warning folks,

Yup. I shoulda said "... in those particular planes."

It won't edit now.
Doh.
Paul.

Originally Posted by pmcgee

Yup. I shoulda said "... in those particular planes."

It won't edit now.
Doh.
Paul.

It's ok Paul, I wasn't chiding you! Your experience re-enforces the message that how thick a blade you can have & still have acceptable adjuster function varies. Unfortunately, there's no certain way to predict, based on make or model, that I'm aware of. You probably have a 75% chance or better that it will be fine, unless you opt for a ridiculously thick chunk of metal. Eyeballing the amount of cam that protrudes through your existing blade should give you a clue, but it's a bit hard to judge by eye, & tricky to measure accurately. I wanted to make people aware that they may strike a problem, that's all.....

Cheers,

I have decided to send the plane to Jim Davey for an overhaul, new handles and blade. Thanks for all your help and suggestions.

should work out cheaper than a new #4 Woodriver plane, which would be nice

Originally Posted by IanW

Eyeballing the amount of cam that protrudes through your existing blade should give you a clue, but it's a bit hard to judge by eye, & tricky to measure accurately. I wanted to make people aware that they may strike a problem, that's all.....
Cheers,

Sure - absolutely.
Maybe laying a feeler gauge on the existing setup might help roughly measure what extra room there is to manoeuvre?
I guess you'd have to move the adjustment through its full range to see how the amount of extra projection varies.

Or if you miss kindergarten, you could cut a duplicate of your blade from cardboard and put them both in your plane??

Cheers,
Paul