Thread: Have you checked your hand planes

If your sole is not square, you just adjust your blade angle, to compensate.

To true up the plane, get some 120 grit sand paper (Belt Sander belts cut in half are durable), and glue to it so some heavy MDF or granite slab. Then by applying selective pressure and frequent checking you can get true up your plane square.

Do a search for fettling stanley plane, here is one I quickly found: Fettling A Plane from Junker to Jointer - Sawmill Creek

Yes, most Stanleys and look-alikes will be out somewhere if not everywhere.

Brizylad - Frankly, I think the fuss about having perfect squareness of sides to soles is overrated as far as most planes are concerned. We were inducted into the mysteries of shooting boards at a tender age, using standard #4s and 5s & I don't think anyone ever looked at the squareness or otherwise of sides to soles. As Thumbsucker points out, the blade set & angle has just as much or more effect. Personally, I wouldn't advocate his solution, though it would work, no doubt. I like to have the blade set evenly to the sole - otherwise you are trying to take too big a cut on one side & too little (or not at all) on t'other, which reduces your control. A shooting board is just a device for holding the workpiece - the operator has to apply some skill to get the desired result. You'll never acquire real handskill if you rely totally on guides, and the results will most likely never satisfy you, either.

When using something like a #5 on a shooting board, it is all too easy to put a smidgin of extra pressure one way or the other, & affect the cut in both planes. So we were shown how to make a virtue out of the vice. You take a few swipes, then check for squareness in both planes. Put the piece back & adjust your hand pressure to correct any developing error. After a few more cuts, check again. It didn't seem to take that much practice to get it right, & pretty soon you'll find you have a lot of control over the process. In 50 years of using planes, I have never bothered to check a single one of mine other than shoulder planes for squareness. And as a matter of fact, shoulder planes are better, IMO, if they have a slight (emphasis on slight) taper from bottom up, rather than being dead square.....

I suspect there will be some differences of opinion on this....

Originally Posted by IanW

Brizylad - Frankly, I think the fuss about having perfect squareness of sides to soles is overrated as far as most planes are concerned. We were inducted into the mysteries of shooting boards at a tender age, using standard #4s and 5s & I don't think anyone ever looked at the squareness or otherwise of sides to soles. As Thumbsucker points out, the blade set & angle has just as much or more effect. Personally, I wouldn't advocate his solution, though it would work, no doubt. I like to have the blade set evenly to the sole - otherwise you are trying to take too big a cut on one side & too little (or not at all) on t'other, which reduces your control. A shooting board is just a device for holding the workpiece - the operator has to apply some skill to get the desired result. You'll never acquire real handskill if you rely totally on guides, and the results will most likely never satisfy you, either.

When using something like a #5 on a shooting board, it is all too easy to put a smidgin of extra pressure one way or the other, & affect the cut in both planes. So we were shown how to make a virtue out of the vice. You take a few swipes, then check for squareness in both planes. Put the piece back & adjust your hand pressure to correct any developing error. After a few more cuts, check again. It didn't seem to take that much practice to get it right, & pretty soon you'll find you have a lot of control over the process. In 50 years of using planes, I have never bothered to check a single one of mine other than shoulder planes for squareness. And as a matter of fact, shoulder planes are better, IMO, if they have a slight (emphasis on slight) taper from bottom up, rather than being dead square.....

I suspect there will be some differences of opinion on this....

Ian,
You have put your finger right on it.
Many people new to handwork expect to be able to "apply the tool to the work" with success, and so that's what they do. (Note the "requirement" for new hand tool from the big name makers to work perfectly right out of the box.)
Your explanation is so spot on.
I like to use the expression feeling the feedback, and adjusting the tool in use.
For some of us these subtle hand skills are hardwired from birth, and for others, sadly it is a skill that will elude them forever. I've met some of the smartest most articulate people, but that instantaneous connection between hand, brain and eye that enables the whole body's posture to adjust to make a tool work well, is missing for them.
These skills can be learned by most people to some degree, but what you need to do is learn by doing it. When time is precious the need is for instant results, and they are VERY elusive. Forever relying on jigs and guides is the way to learn slowly.
Paying more for a tool is not the answer to becoming a better tool user either. Guidance in this skill, and perseverance with freehand use of the tool will certainly make you more connected to the tool...more intimate with the way it feeds back what is happening at the cutting edge...that's the answer.
You must tune the tool, that's a given...but also buy wisely. #4 & #5 planes are cheap as anything, and good ones are pretty easy to find.
Regards,
Peter

True, but you can't get 1 thou shavings safely from a plane with 3 thou of concavity in the sole can you?

So you either buy a good plane with a flat base or learn to flatten a Stanley (who used to publicise their tools as within 3 thou tolerance).

Ern - I agree with your general sentiments, that a poor & badly-fettled tool will not do fine work. However, I challenge the need to take off 1 thou shavings when shooting end-grain. I want to get the piece squared & get onto the next stage, & the fewer passes I have to make, the more my old RSI-challenged shoulders like it! I have never measured the thickness of a plane shaving, ever, so I have no idea what thickness I would take off when shooting, but they would be substantially more than .001".

I suspect you would agree with Peter in principle (I certainly do!), that too much emphasis is placed on "accuracy" of tools that probably don't need to be of such fine tolerences. I've seen skilled hands do the most miraculous things with the most elementary tools. Of course, "good" tools should be fit for purpose, i.e. they ought to work "out of the box". Being sure a tool will do what it is supposed to is a big help, but a raw beginner could get into trouble just by taking the blade out of his new LN plane & putting it back upside down (which has happened), so it's no absolute gaurantee.

Young fellas nowadays want to master everything on a Sunday afternoon, and that's rarely possible, so it is a good idea for them to buy good tools that are ready to go, if they can afford them. That way they know it's probably not the tool when things don't go right (unless they've mis-assembled it as above). But if you take on a hobby as a lifelong pursuit, there ought to be plenty of time to acquire at least modest skill. I'll bet you can do things with a skew these days, using pure 'muscle memory' that would have been unthinkable the first few times you picked one up. And it wouldn't have mattered how much you paid for it, or what tolerances the skew was manufactured to.....

Cheers,

Thanks for all your comments.

I wasn't keen on Thumbsuckers idea of changing the blade angle because it is too frustrating getting it back.

I am guilty trying to get everything perfect first time, but I have learnt (sometimes the hard way) that rarely happens.

In my mind, the main problem is trying to get things done too quickly.

Next time I am on the shooting board, I'll take it slow and easy and try to work out the effect, and then compensate.

Stuart J.

In reply to IanW: Yes, I realise with my response that I'd moved from shooting end grain to jointing/smoothing long grain and had a rigorous fettling standard in mind. Fettling is where my energies are at the moment.

Fully agree about gear. I do cross-country skiing when faulty joints permit, and read a lot of US forum material where the obsession is with the latest/bestest/techiest gear, and my std crusty response is to argue that folk would be better off spending money on lessons and time on practice. Gets nowhere of course because it's a consumer culture indoctrinated to believe that to get better only requires the latest gear. But what I've seen competent back country tourers/telemarkers do here on the most basic of gear makes me green.

There's a saying about pets that I've adapted to try and capture this approach: a tool is for life, not just Xmas. Or: every tool has a learning overhead; there is no shortcut.

That's not to say that all tools have the same overhead. With some I just run out of patience. With others, like a skew chisel in woodturning, there's a high overhead but also a high payoff.

K, rant over.

Good points Ian.
I have often wondered how much the market for the higher end planes is carried by people not getting satisfactory results from adequate planes because of lack of skill in sharpening etc. Also how many of the higher end planes are an eventual let down because of the same reason.
Cheers,
Jim

Yes, a Veritas BU plane for example is a lovely bit of kit, but you have to be well equipped to maintain an A2 blade edge, and I wonder how many folk just keep pushing when the edge is dull and get ordinary results.

Muscle memory is a good description. I've had a highly skilled craftsman explaining how he did a particular job and his words were accompanied by his hands following the tool movements he used.
Cheers,
Jim

Oh yes. LOL. I go through stages in bowl turning of favouring a partic form, and when I change it the damn body has to be dragged out of its old pattern into a new one. Sometimes I get distracted by the shear physical pleasure of shavings flying over the shoulder and woops, it's the old form I've turned.

Doubly hard when it comes to teaching turning. Unconscious competence has to be deconstructed into conscious competence in order to give useful instructions to a learner.

Ern - I was pretty sure from reading other posts by you that we would be on much the same page....

Brizylad - don't feel unique - trying to do everything NOW was my downfall for a good proportion of my life, as I'm sure it has been for most of us.

And Jimbur - I couldn't agree more that the biggest problem with most edge-tools is sharpening. I well remember how I wrestled with sharpening for years! Mostly with limited success, until I decided to figure out just what it was I needed to do (simply bring two planes to a STRAIGHT intersection, with the edge as finely-finished as stones would go to) & set about practising until I got it right...

I also wonder how many LNs & LV planes are languishing out there, due to dull blades & lack of application in learning to drive them properly. But I'll nominate the tools most likely to suffer after the 'factory gloss' wanes, & that's those nice brass & fancy-handled backsaws proliferating on the market. Most professional saw-sharpening services know diddly-squat about sharpening handsaws, so owners of these very expensive (and very nice, to be sure!) beasties are faced with either sending back to the factory every time they get dull, or learning the arcane art for themselves ( a steep learning-curve, but not impossible).

Or just buy a new one....

Cheers,

Very few of the old planes that I've bought have sides square to the sole (one did - pleasant surprise). I usually lap them on sandpaper stuck to glass, to try to get the soles something approaching flat. And if I intend to use a plane for shooting I try to get the sides something approaching square (otherwise I don't really care). But I don't stress about it, and when I get them near enough that's usually close enough for me. I agree hugely with the comments by Ern and Ian about learning how to use them properly - something I'm still a long way off mastering.

I find that if I get the plane as fettled as I can it helps me get the best results my skills can manage. And I also enjoy the fettling process. It is surprising how quickly a plane will square up with a bit of pressure applied in the appropriate places when lapping the sides or base. And I also find that when I'm planing I apply pressure unconsciously on one side or the other and always need to correct that anyway - no matter how well set up the plane is - because I'm just not that good at it yet. Practice...