Thread: Hand planes

Hi Steven,

Maybe like me you bought every plane that came across your path when you first started out. One of the best things I did was to whittle my bench plane collection down to the ones in the photo above. You may choose differently which ones to keep and I would understand completely. For example the people that love the 5 1/2. I then got the ones I kept in the best shape I possibly could. Things like flattening the sole, fitting the cap iron, upgrading the blade, fixing any issues with the handles, cambers etc. It's deciding to maximise the quality and efficiency of the ones that you actually use and freeing yourself from little decisions like which number 4 to pull out and use. Sorry if this is telling you how to suck eggs but this really helped my woodworking.

Thanks,
Zac.

Sent from my Nokia 4.2 using Tapatalk

All excellent points, Zac. I think the only thing that saves many of us from buying a million planes when we begin is lack of funds. Experience is the only thing that can really inform us of whet we "need".

But like Derek, I misunderstood the question the OP posed, which seems to have been more to do with which planes are our favourites, rather than which four planes we regard as essential to our work. My answer would be much the same, as it turns out, but I might change the list slightly depending on the day. I do have a couple of planes that I like very much, but use far less often, & would try my darnedest to sneak them in somehow if I were forced to cut my tools down to a bare minimum.

You can certainly get by with a minimum of tools, and make reasonably elaborate stuff - I did for many years! But there are few among us who can resist the allure of a tool that looks 'beautiful' (to our eyes at least), or we think will make some process or other a doddle instead of a chore. And so the problem of over-stuffed tool chests begins....

Cheers,

Ian, my previous post can stand for someone looking to start out hand tool furniture making. I stand behind those choices.

If I were to take them up a notch, as I looked for cost-effective tools at that time, then my choice would be ....

1. Jack plane: the Stanley #605, as before.

2. Jointer: Veritas Custom #7 (40 degree bed)

3. Smoother: Veritas Custom #4 (42 degree bed)

4. Plough: Veritas Combination Plane.

All with PM-V11 blades.

Regards from Perth

Derek

Originally Posted by stevenjd

I think that is one of the disadvantages of having way to many planes and not really mastering them properly.

Stephen, I only own five bench planes (discounting my router and plough planes). Two each of old restored #4 and #5, and a Stanley #4.5. I was much like you, just grabbing whatever and never really getting great results. Then I read/heard a comment somewhere by an older craftsman about a hand plane being like a musical instrument, and the more time you spend with it, the better you know how to get the best from it. As a musician this struck a chord with me, and echoed my guitar experience.

And so I picked my favourite #4 (sentimental, as my first plane purchase) and used it exclusively for several months. This forced me to take the time to understand why some operations caused issues rather then just grab a different plane. I can now say that this is my favourite plane, because I know it so intimately. I know that certain operations will require a little more pressure here or there, and a knock from a bad start will necessitate a little left pressure on the lateral adjustment lever because it always slips that way. I know when setting the chip breaker how much movement to allow for when tightening the screw. All those little idiosyncrasies I no longer need to consider. I get to enjoy a plane that whilst nowhere near perfect, just works for me, and I get great results from it.

Don’t get me wrong, I do fantasise about finding a nice clean old #4 with the original parts that fit together properly with none of the issues mine has, but in the interim I have a plane I enjoy immensely.

I encourage you to try something similar with one plane and see how you go.

Hi Lance. That is one of the best things I have read on this forum. Thanks

But Ian... what if your tool chest is overstuffed with things like a Veritas Medium Shoulder Plane?

That is good stuffed.

It's a bit of a trick question because you can probably get away (for eg) without a jointer if you have a good side shooting board - or quality measuring and marking-out materials to give you marks or lines to plane to.

Are you in the woods with nothing else and clamping everything between your knees?

Or in a shop with all your vices, jigs, clamps and whatnot?

Either way - these thought experiments that involve minimising one's plane collection are barbaric.

Hi CG. In spite of my previous post yours just made me laugh, so thanks for that too.

Originally Posted by Cgcc

But Ian... what if your tool chest is overstuffed with things like a Veritas Medium Shoulder Plane?

That is good stuffed.

True, but good-stuffed can still get to be over-stuffed...

We're all in this together - let's be honest, part of the allure of this woodworking business is the tools. There are few things more satisfying than tools that are a delight to the eye as well as satisfying to use. I'm at least as guilty as anyone, not at all ashamed, so I'm not giving up any just yet!

But Lance's little nugget of advice above is very sound. The gain in efficiency or quality of work you get from the "best" tool over a decent user-grade is marginal - much of the "improvement" you feel when you finally get the tool of your dreams comes from believing that tool will be good for you. Musicians go weak at the knees over certain instruments and claim their sound is unique, but a BBC producer once did a little experiment with a very competent violinist playing a Stradivarius and a good modern violin behind a screen, to an audience of some of the most eminent & respected violinists of the 20th century. They were asked to note which instrument played which piece. All scored about 50/50, which is a very strong indication they were simply guessing.

I know the argument that says a newbie is more likely to succeed with a top-notch tool that works 'out of the box' than struggling with an indifferent one, and concede there is merit in that argument. But I reckon you will actually learn more using the indifferent tool if you persevere & put in the time it takes to learn what makes it tick.

The reason I sometimes get a bit agitated is that a newbie can too easily get the impression that they couldn't make anything decent without first spending an unconscionable amount of money on tools. That's manifestly not so, some of the best furniture ever produced was made with very ordinary tools, and pretty nice tools can be made using ordinary ones, too! Care & persistence is what usually comes up trumps...

Cheers,

Originally Posted by derekcohen

Ian, my previous post can stand for someone looking to start out hand tool furniture making. I stand behind those choices.

If I were to take them up a notch, as I looked for cost-effective tools at that time, then my choice would be ....

1. Jack plane: the Stanley #605, as before.

2. Jointer: Veritas Custom #7 (40 degree bed)

3. Smoother: Veritas Custom #4 (42 degree bed)

4. Plough: Veritas Combination Plane.

All with PM-V11 blades.

Regards from Perth

Derek

Hi Derek,

It's interesting to see the progression we make in tool use. I recall quite a while back that you were a great advocate of the BU planes, particularly the BU jack (as was I). I still like the Veritable BU jack, but now much prefer the Bedrock pattern 5 1/2 as my go to plane.

Edit: Just noticed that the damned auto correct struck again!! However Veritable might indeed be a reasonable substitute for Veritas

I've personally never seen much intrinsic value in expensive replica planes. I'm sure Tom Lie Neilsen made lovely tools in his lifetime, & that the company he founded still does. But they're just replicas after all. Surely, a well made, well maintained original Bailey from the "golden years" will perform well when correctly fettled & equipped with a quality blade & cap iron?

I'm ready to be convinced to the contrary, but given the numbers of used tools available at reasonable prices, I could never personally justify the expense of what appears to be fundamentally "just" a replica when an "original" is so much less expensive. The same also holds true for the Clifton range of planes too.

Leonard Lee from Lee Valley seems to be able to constantly reinvent the various time-tested tools to, with varying degrees of success, market thoughtful and useful redesigns of popular plane sizes. Yes, they're expensive. But at least to some extent by creating a "better mousetrap" some if not all of the additional expense is justified.

I should add that I have neither Lie Nielsen nor Lee Valley planes. I DO particularly like that lovely little NX/DX Block Plane duo, but find the price ludicrously unjustifiable. But if more well-heeled & cashed up connoisseurs find them not just desireable, but also accessable, then more power to them. I'd also like to have a Maserati GT or maybe an Alfa Romeo Montreal in my carport, too, but that's never gonna happen either!

My most valuable plane is probably my 150 year old No. 8 Bailey Jointer. My most expensive is the Calvert Stevens CS88. Yet neither would approach the price of a new replica plane of equivalent size. These are both in my "4 favourites" list as the former does its job better than anything else I've tried. The Calvert Stevens is just a little bit "special" to me. It's one of only 2 planes that I've ever bought new. It's special in that it's sufficiently "different" in a good way. It came with a lovely hardwood case, all baize-lined & constructed from "superior" materials & modified in a way that added to its utility. Those extra little touches like the limited edition number stamping under the tote, a certificate signed by both Marty Calvert & Mel Stevens, all that Gunmetal & Bronze & beautiful British Racing Green paintwork all helped defray the pain of its GBP 100 Quid pricetag. It was, at the time, quite an indulgent extravagance, but in the end I still find it justifiable. Just. It's actually a wider "4 1/2" size, so it's realistically neither my most used or even useful smoother.

My most used planes are (in descending order) the English Stanley 60 1/2A Block, Tasmanian Stanley No. 3 smoother, a Record 06 Fore Plane & maybe an old Record 311 Shoulder/Rabbet plane, none of which would sell for anything over $100 on the used market. I'm sure others will disagree vehemently, but I'd contend that a sub $100 quality second-hand plane purchase will perform (once fettled) not just adequately but on occasion better than much more expensive new replicas can.

You could theoretically have a full and comprehensive used premium plane collection (a dozen or more) for the price of 4 new fancy replicas!

I love some of my old Stanleys but I think there are definitely some areas the Lie-Nielsens and WoodRivers are well ahead of their vintage counterparts.

1) Chipbreaker and iron. You can get by with the originals but I can get far better results in cranky timber with a modern blade and thick chipbreaker.

2) Lateral adjust lever. I find these pretty hit or miss on old planes. Huge amounts of slack can be present before they start adjusting and they're just pretty loose overall compared to the LN.

I got by just fine with my Stanleys and there are several I'll never part with but I'm much happier with my Lie Nielsens and WoodRivers.

Originally Posted by Ratbag

... Surely, a well made, well maintained original Bailey from the "golden years" will perform well when correctly fettled & equipped with a quality blade & cap iron?...

Discussions on forums have been round this merry-go-round many times. The answer is in your question.

The time, skill and effort to fettle a plane is eliminated when buying a premium plane. Many people want to woodwork, not metalwork, and are more than happy to buy a desirable plane that "just works". Others value their time (literally) and see the premium plane as a cheaper alternative.

And given the resale value, these planes may be no more expensive in the long term.

Originally Posted by RossM

Discussions on forums have been round this merry-go-round many times. The answer is in your question.

The time, skill and effort to fettle a plane is eliminated when buying a premium plane. Many people want to woodwork, not metalwork, and are more than happy to buy a desirable plane that "just works". Others value their time (literally) and see the premium plane as a cheaper alternative.

And given the resale value, these planes may be no more expensive in the long term.

Point taken, but the trouble with "resale value" is that it's unrealised until disposal. Meaning that you're missing out on either your original purchased tool when sold or any other less expensive equivalent/s if not. In the meantime, you're not benefiting from 3-4 (or possibly even more) nice quality used alternatives.

I've similarly wondered about the appeal of used Bedrock-style Stanleys. I only have one: a pre-Great Depression 604. Meh! I just don't get it. Why the reverence? Why are they twice the price? Once fettled & set, my planes' frogs remain all but locked in position.

As far as smoothers are concerned, I'd rather have a variety of individual tools with pre-set depth-of-cut, blade camber, edge geometry etc. I think I have about 5 or so, each with specific tasks in mind. Apart from the frog seating & shape of the lands, they're otherwise indistinguishable in performance from any other equivalent Bailey. Perhaps that's why they were never as popular and were dropped from the range during both the Great Depression (the corrugated sole versions) & the War (all the rest), never to be seen again until the premium-priced replicas from the likes of Tom Lie Neilsen et.al.

Far more important to me is the setup of the cap-iron. I detest having to accurately re-set the cap each time the edge is touched up (which is often different for each setup): usually a few strokes only on a hard stone. This is where the Record/Clifton "Stay-Set" makes sense to me. I have one on a few of my planes, & am a bit of a fan-boy. Without removing any substantial length from the blade's edge, the cap-iron's clearance remains utterly undisturbed, saving valuable time & accuracy. A change of blade & cap-iron is often a massive improvement in terms of performance, & often all that's required to transform a good plane into a great one.


Addendum: I apologise. I actually DO own a Veritas plane. Just remembered that I have a Stanley-replica "Little Victor" Thumbnail plane.