Thread: Handplanes - woodies - DIY - any reason why not?

Originally Posted by LanceC

Those look outstanding MA. And the fact that they work well too is brilliant. I have considered building one specifically for shooting with a lower angle, but that will have to wait for next year.

Lance, here is a build of a Strike Block Plane - bevel down with a 38 degree bed (in other words, a 38 degree cutting angle). Ideal for the shooting board ...

http://www.inthewoodshop.com/ShopMad...lockPlane.html

Tight mouth ...





Enjoy

Regards from Perth

Derek

Originally Posted by woodPixel

All this makes me wonder why variable angle hand planes are not a thing.

I've been giving it some thought while I meditate (I use it like Shower Thoughts).

Three adjustable bolts would do the trick on a hinged carriage mounted in the body as a frame.

Two upper bolts act as dead-locators and wind in/out for setting the angle and the under-bolt locks it into place.

One could use the same bevel up blade and move the bed from.... 12° up to 45 or 50°.

Wonder why this hasn't been done. Must be a good reason ....

Evan, it has been tried. Bridge City Tools made one ...

VP-60 Variable Pitch Plane



However it became obsolete once setting the art of chipbreaker was learned. Close up the chipbreaker, and you only need one setting.

Actually, even BU planes only need 25- and 50- degree blade settings.

Regards from Perth

Derek

Originally Posted by woodPixel

All this makes me wonder why variable angle hand planes are not a thing.

I've been giving it some thought while I meditate (I use it like Shower Thoughts).

Three adjustable bolts would do the trick on a hinged carriage mounted in the body as a frame.

Two upper bolts act as dead-locators and wind in/out for setting the angle and the under-bolt locks it into place.

One could use the same bevel up blade and move the bed from.... 12° up to 45 or 50°.

Wonder why this hasn't been done. Must be a good reason ....

WP

Would it be to do with the mouth opening and relative positioning of the blade?

Regards
Paul

Edit: I neglected to read on past your post. I see The Chief and Derek have both addressed the issue.

Originally Posted by woodPixel

All this makes me wonder why variable angle hand planes are not a thing. .....
.....Wonder why this hasn't been done. Must be a good reason ....

Oh but it has, many times & many ways, WP. The simplest variable pitch planes are the bevel-up planes for which you vary the cutting angle by grinding the appropriate bevel on the blade. However, I take it you don't mean such a neanderthaloid method, but some sort of easy-peasy dial-up way of rotating the blade istself? The earliest attempt I've read about goes well back to the 1860s (in an old Lee Valley news letter, iirc). I can't find who patented the very first variable pitch plane, but we even had an Australian version. If you like tools inspired by Star Wars (& have very deep pockets), you can have a Bridge city 'adjustable angle' plane, but not sure if that qualifies as it's really only variable in fixed steps. None of the several variable-pitch planes offered to the eager public over the years has gained any significant following, it seems, except amongst collectors.

As to why we don't all have one in our tool-kits, there are many reasons - cost would be a big factor with the Bridge-city thingy. Another is good old-fashioned conservatism & scepticism - experience teaches us that jacks of all trades are rarely master of any. But there are practical reasons too, and one is the difficulty of making a frog that can rotate, but still lock rock-solid in position. Yet another is that you would need an exceedingly complex mechanism to be able to vary pitch without varying depth of cut, so you have to fiddle about with your plane quite a bit in order to find that perfect cutting angle. Meanwhile, I've tried two or three other planes & found one that does the job well enough & half-finished while you're getting your plane set up to perfection.....

I also think that 99% of us just like having a suite of planes - it gives us some sense of security & satisfaction just knowing you can call on all that back-up. I have had several "konmari" revelations in my life & set about de-cluttering my toolbox - I can make 99% of what I want to make with 3 or 4 planes, if pushed, so why have I got more than 20??. My bog-standard (well, not quite bog-standard, they all have after-market blades) Bailey types can get me 95% of the way on the worst woods I've struck, and scrapers or even (horrors!) abrasive papers can get me the rest of the way, so why use two more planes to gain another 4% (on those woods, nothing gets to 100%!), as I'm won't to do?. Given the time spent sharpening & fiddling with the lot of them, I know I would spend less time if I just had a few essentials.

Hmmm, so which ones am I going to throw out.....?

Cheers,

Edit: Everyone up early this morning? While I was typing, there was a deluge of replies!

Originally Posted by derekcohen

Lance, here is a build of a Strike Block Plane - bevel down with a 38 degree bed (in other words, a 38 degree cutting angle). Ideal for the shooting board ...

http://www.inthewoodshop.com/ShopMad...lockPlane.html

Excellent! Thanks Derek.

Well Alice, that was a Rabbit Hole worth exploring.

I wish I hadn't stuck my head in, for I saw the VP60 from Bridge City.... oops!

Here are some pictures from https://www.worthpoint.com/worthopedia/bridge-city-tool-works-vp-60-variable-1852914757

VP60 Bridge City 4.jpg VP60 Bridge City 3.jpg VP60 Bridge City 2.jpg VP60 Bridge City 1.jpg

I got the inspiration from Derek's strike block plane as I also had an old blade hanging around. I did not have the confidence nor any floats for solid block construction so went the glued up method. Having the low blade angle is good for a shooting board plane. I keep the sharpening angle at about 25* btw.
Regards
John

Originally Posted by woodPixel

Well Alice, that was a Rabbit Hole worth exploring.

I wish I hadn't stuck my head in, for I saw the VP60 from Bridge City.... oops!

Here are some pictures from https://www.worthpoint.com/worthopedia/bridge-city-tool-works-vp-60-variable-1852914757

VP60 Bridge City 4.jpg VP60 Bridge City 3.jpg VP60 Bridge City 2.jpg VP60 Bridge City 1.jpg

Wow it sure is a looker. I take it you bought it?
A long way from home made woodies but with christmas almost here I can see the attraction.
Regards
John

I'd forgotten about the VP-60 when I replied above; it's been out of production for 15 years anyway. I was thinking of the B.C. HP-12, which is a "dual angle" plane with 2 blades giving you 4 fixed pitches. It's a little less of a strain on your pocket at US$769 than the VP-60. The last sale of a second-hand one went for north of 1,500 US$!

Neither would ever be on my shopping list......

Cheers

Not bought, but amazed by its pure sexiness.

I really love the steampunk look in general.

Originally Posted by woodPixel

... amazed by its pure sexiness.

It's funny how our perceptions change over time. I think that plane looks terrible. But then I used to wonder why anyone would buy a Veritas plane with it's weird adjustment system that made it look dodgy. Now I think Veritas planes are a thing of beauty. Perhaps one day I will think that that Swiss cheese of a plane sole looks lovely too.... or not

Originally Posted by LanceC

It's funny how our perceptions change over time. I think that plane looks terrible. But then I used to wonder why anyone would buy a Veritas plane with it's weird adjustment system that made it look dodgy. Now I think Veritas planes are a thing of beauty. Perhaps one day I will think that that Swiss cheese of a plane sole looks lovely too.... or not

To each his own, Lance - fugly is the word I'd use to describe those B.C. planes, but there are enough people who think they are works of art to keep the company in business, so good luck to them all - variety is the spice of life.

Beauty is not an objective quality, nor is it a stable property, so you can't lay down rules that hold up in the short or long term. I think some of the old infills are far more attractive than any B.C. plane I've ever seen, but they weren't received with universal enthusiasm in their day either. Plenty of the old codgers of the day preferred their blocks of Beechwood (which I find awkward to use) and carried on doing amazing work with them. Cost, of course, was not in their favour, nor is it for B.C. products......

We could debate their ergonomics, which B.C. make a great to-do about, but their copywriter is rather prone to hyperbole, viz. their plane is made with "exceedingly difficult" dovetail joints (they are quite easy to do after a small amount of practice!) . To me, they simply don't look at all hand-friendly and prejudice tends to be a self-fulfilling prophesy, so they would have to be truly revelatory to feel better than any of my planes. I seriously doubt they could live up to such expectations.

But I still commend them for wanting to build better mouse-traps....

Cheers,

One thing that has repeated itself in all of my notes is simple: use a 25° blade and add an appropriate microbevel to match the job.

For BU at least.

The need to set a plane at 34.6°, or some other arbitrary angle, is unnecessary. The added complication of an adjustable angle *seems* important, but it aint. I understand this now. Apologies for going over well trodden tracks proclaiming discovery!

I liked the above comment (can't find it now) as to "WHY would one have a single plane, when 3 would suffice"

Oh, so true.

But the answer is at least 6. That poster was wrong.

My wife is asking me Serious Questions as to JUST how many MORE planes I intend getting.... I've cleaned out an entire bedroom draw in the tallboy just to store them

I'm pushing the limits on tolerable behaviour

I think I can make room for a BU Jointer, a medium shoulder plane and, perhaps, a Small Plow Plane (or Combination plane) if I have troubles with my Record 405 (being restored! Big reveal soon!)....

Too much time on my hands

Originally Posted by Chief Tiff

It has been tried before with limited success, basically the geometry of the pivot point required to swing the bed means that the mouth opening would have to be massive. You would also need to make the mouth adjustable, a bit like the way a 62 has an adjustable mouth. Rigidity would be an issue also.

Lie Nielson has adopted the most cost effective solution for bevel down planes, he offers different frogs for his smoothing planes so you can have a 45, 50 or 55 degree bedding angle.

The issue with the frogs is that if they'd had historical value (when people were using planes professionally), they would've been offered. They weren't, though, because that style of plane works better with a 45 degree bed and use of the cap iron for tearout prevention. A steeper pitch is not as good at tearout prevention as the cap iron and it makes the iron life shorter and the plane harder to push. It becomes an issue if you have to do any significant work.

I make planes. Generally for me. I've made single iron woodies, moulding planes, infill planes and double iron wooden planes. And probably something else I'm not recalling right now.

I'd suggest old wooden planes and stanley type planes first. I know (from derek's advice) that you have some worse stuff to plane in aus. than we generally encounter here, but from here also, that some can manage to use medium hardwoods because they're available locally (instead of ultra hard woods). the large english pattern planes will be hard on you if you're working wood that's jarrah hardness or harder. Stanley (or premium versions) planes won't have an issue with it.

I, too, have premium planes - though not many now, and recently tested a bunch of irons and planed several tends of thousands of feet. The premium planes are smooth and stable, but the friction is greater than vintage planes. If you're using them (especially if premium and bronze), wax regularly in rhythm - like every hundred feet of planing, or you'll get fatigued and mistake friction for dullness.

I second derek's comments about jumping in and making planes right away before using proven designs. You'll throw those planes away eventually, or immediately. It seems restrictive to have to believe that the established designs are 99.99% better than anything you'll come up with (or any cheap stuff that paul has you make when buying isn't that tall of an order - separate comment about single mortise single-purpose planes following), but it is the case, and most of us have learned it the hard way.

comment about the open mortise planes of a single-use type. If you are cutting details or small grooves, those open mortise style planes are fantastic. They're quick to make, etc.

If you're going to try to do everything with that type (like moving fillisters, etc) - skip that, buy the real closed-mortise types or established design metal planes.