Thread: Melbourne Tool Company

I read this thread and:

1) Agree with sentiments that it's a bit misleading to call it "Melbourne Tool Company". I was immediately intrigued that a new tool company making planes had started up but a little clicking revealed the manufacturing was not based in Melbourne. It's liable to mislead consumers. It's a bit hard to call it dishonest in the red-blooded sense given if you dig through it is reasonably clear but it puts a bad taste in the mouth.

2) I just can't see the point. Those who know or are willing to learn what they are doing will pick up cheap Stanleys and fettle up. There are almost the same as an existing brand (Quangsheng). They don't seem to be cheap crap as in the type of thing sold at Bunnings but are not a premium anything like Veritas, Lie Nielson or HNT Gordon.

So, why?

Originally Posted by Chief Tiff

... I wonder if MTC would be interested in supplying a pair of planes for a review?

I can only ask I guess....

To be a fair review, Chief, they should also supply you with an equivalent pair of Lee valley planes, purely for comparative purposes.

Going with the Lada/Trabant vs Lada/Ferrari analogy I happy to use my Lubans for this purpose!

This afternoon I received this reply from MTC:

Hi Ian

Thanks for your interest in the Melbourne Tool Company hand planes.
I am a member of Timbecon's management team, MTC is a wholly owned subsidiary of Timbecon.

Last week Australian Wood Review published their magazine issue #115.
Within that edition of the magazine there is a detailed review of both MTC hand planes written by Brisbane Craftsman Robert Howard.

I think Roberts review is reasonably comprehensive, hopefully that will help ease the concerns of the forum community.

As a policy Timbecon does not provide tools free of charge for public reviews.
If you wish to try out the tools, they are on display and ready for use in both of our showrooms in Perth and Melbourne.
I invite you and the members of your community to go have a look, try them out and comment as you like.

Attached is a Press Release for MTC, the same document shared with Australian Wood Review and various other stakeholders.
I hope this document explains more thoroughly what we are doing and why we are doing it.
In short, to produce an affordable plane, that works and is readily available to enthusiast woodworkers.

I hope this helps.

Cheers,

John Madden

So; a not-exactly-unexpected “Thanks, but no thanks” response but at least they replied. What did surprise me though is the news that MTC is actually a Timbecon subsidiary. I had suspected the two companies were related in some way even if it was just through supply contracts but didn’t consider direct ownership.

I’m away at work till next month so my copy of AWR will be waiting for me at home. I’m looking forward to reading the review; although I doubt it will be the MTC/Luban comparison I am interested in at least they’ve engaged a respected woodworker in Robert Howard.

This does pose the question though of whether Timbecon will continue selling Luban planes once the MTC range expands to include the smoother, jointer, router and spokeshaves referenced in the attached press release.

Hi Chief,

The link didn't work for me.

Originally Posted by BEM

Hi Chief,

The link didn't work for me.

Nor me but I figured out how to attach the PDF instead!

Originally Posted by Chief Tiff

Nor me but I figured out how to attach the PDF instead!

The link worked for me.

I was going to post last night after getting my copy of AWR. The review covers both the block plane and the 'jack' plane. It's far & away the most intelligent review so far, by someone who does own (& use) other brands, so there are some comparisons mentioned, but not a head-to-head such as CT is proposing. That sort of thing may come in time, but meanwhile, there's enough in Robert's review to give you some help if you are in the market for one of these styles of plane & trying to decide where to throw your money.

If you are thinking seriously about one or the other you should certainly read the review. The impression I take from reading it is that these are ok planes of medium build quality, which should do the job adequately, but don't expect Lie-Nielsen finesse. By coincidence or design, there's a review of the Eckert block plane on the previous page - it's nearly twice the price.

There is no mention in the review of the beds on either plane so presumably the machining was ok on these two (as they appeared to be on the 'comedy show' pair). Or at the very least there was nothing to catch the eye like that one in the first review, so it would seem that one was an isolated aberration. Robert had a few niggles with both planes, one of which was the screw that tightens the lever cap on the block plane. He felt it was too easy to over-tighten the LC with it, possibly damaging the LC in time. This is the same system used on the "old original" block planes like my 110, which gave me some trouble when the thread inside the cap stripped (most likely due to over-enthusiastic tightening!). It was easy enough to fix, I was able to re-tap the LC & thumbwheel to take a larger bolt. That was 40 plus years ago & there've been no problems since, though I think I learnt my lesson & use a little more restraint these days. As I often comment, most of us tend to over-tighten any LC locked by screw pressure, it's just too easy given the mechanical advantage of the screw plus the 'lever' effect.

Oh & it's good issue of AWR for other articles, though you can probably skip the one by some barmy bloke that made a toolbox full of useless mini-tools.......

Cheers,

All these reviews and specs on websites and I cant see a weight for any of these block planes !

Anyone know what they weigh ?

I want to compare them to my older Stanley block planes.
They look heavier. I normally like light planes but heavier for a one handed plane could possibly be a good thing for the table edge planing I was doing today. 40mm thick Oak ends x 4 and they have to be block planed or spoke shaved to get a sculpted slightly bowed D end. The longer sides get done with the tops on their side . The working height is one meter off the ground . But the ends would be two meters high if I did that . So they stay laying down flat to be worked on.

https://www.timbecon.com.au/knuckle-...xoCDJsQAvD_BwE


https://www.timbecon.com.au/melbourn...le-block-plane


Veritas Low-Angle Block Plane with PM-V11 25 Deg Blade | Carbatec

The Luban LA block plane feels almost twice the weight of my Stanley 65; it is h-e-a-v-y. I was using it on 14mm x 4mm ebony to make precise Kumiko pieces and just throwing it back and forth an inch was bloody hard work after a while; using the 65 was much easier but the blade couldn’t hold it’s edge anywhere near as long as the Luban.

Somewhere recently I saw a comment that either it or the MTC LA block plane weighed around 900g but I can’t find it again now…

Originally Posted by Chief Tiff

The Luban LA block plane feels almost twice the weight of my Stanley 65; it is h-e-a-v-y. I was using it on 14mm x 4mm ebony to make precise Kumiko pieces and just throwing it back and forth an inch was bloody hard work after a while; using the 65 was much easier but the blade couldn’t hold it’s edge anywhere near as long as the Luban.

Somewhere recently I saw a comment that either it or the MTC LA block plane weighed around 900g but I can’t find it again now…

Thanks . I'll check My 65 for its weight . It'll be interesting to consider . Not sure it'd be a solution to my problem being that much heavier . I read some comment on a Veritas BP review and one guy said holding it in the air for this type of planing was to much for him . The blade on your Luban sounds good though .

Rob. weight alone is one of those deceptive qualities of a plane, I reckon. Sometimes you notice it, sometimes you don't, sometimes it's nice to have it & sometimes it's not. As I've said myself a few times, there is little point in pushing around more metal than you need to, so I generally select a smaller rather than a larger plane, but there are plenty of exceptions. I love using my 4.5Kg panel plane for finishing a book-matched panel for a cabinet door, but I think I'd get over it pretty soon if I tried finishing a large table top with it!

Planing table edges as you describe would be tricky for me - I'd have to concentrate hard to keep the plane evenly engaged as it follows the curve. Add to that my ageing arms don't like doing anything unusual for long these days so if I had to do that job I think you'd find the table top clamped to the bench & me standing on it (the bench) planing away & trying to avoid becoming entangled in the over-bench lights!

I got rid of the 65 1/2 I'd had for donkey's years when this entered my life:
Adj 1.jpg

It is almost the same length & width as the 65 1/2, a little bit heavier iirc, though not remarkably so. I set the blade at 15* rather than the 12 1/2 of the 65, but couldn't say what difference the blade angle makes to its action (if any), it feels so different from the 65 it's hard to sort out the individual parts of the equation. The big difference is that it's a far nicer tool to hold in my hand. I made it on a whim to use up some scraps of brass & steel that were too small for anything larger, but it's turned out to be one of the best "whims" I've had.

If you ever stumble on an old Norris A31 I'd love to hear what it's like to use. I don't like the look of the 31 (the adjuster-less model), it has a screwed lever cap and looks like a handful of sharp edges to me. I wonder if he switched to the A31 style with its wooden "wedge-lever-cap" as a result of feedback from customers? I've read that there are very few of the A31s around, it was popular with piano makers apparently, other woodworkers took to it less enthusiastically.

Cheers,
Ian

Nice plane you made there Ian . And great links too .
"If I ever stumble on an old Norris A31." lol That'd be nice , It'd have to be Half or less what I see them for for me to buy it .
I did almost have a reasonably priced thumb plane years ago, unsigned but looked to be Spiers. I wish I had gone a bit harder at it . It was on UK ebay. It looked like it had been dug up out of a sand pit . Rust, well aged deeply patinated brass and no blade.
I started building one as well but stopped. Ive got to start it again one day. I would love to be building some planes but I'm still spending any spare time putting my workshop back together.

Originally Posted by auscab

All these reviews and specs on websites and I cant see a weight for any of these block planes !

Anyone know what they weigh ?

I sold a Woodriver block plane a while back because I hardly ever picked it up when I needed a block plane. The Woodriver is another version of the Luban I think. It weighed .83kg