Thread: Original vs. Aftermarket Tweaks - Planes

Hi Gunn,
I would not class myself as a restorer but I have cleaned up a few old tools and put them back into service. I have always used the original blades as there are no worries with modifications. If a blade is missing or not enough left to use then I would get a replacement. The reason for hunting down old planes is that they should have good blades in them. I have a very old No7 with a bit of pitting in the sole. It is not pretty or of collectible quality but it is a pleasure to use. Have a look at some of the tool restoration on Norse Woodsmith .


Regards
John

This site was posted on a thread last year and provides some useful comparative data on cutters:

http://www3.telus.net/BrentBeach/Sharpen/bladetest.html

I have replaced the OEM Stanley bladed in my No's 4 1/2 and 8 with aftermarket blades as IMHO the Stanley blades did not cope with the Australian hardwood I threw at them, mainly Ironbark & Tallwwood. The 4 1/2 has got a Hock Blade and Chipbreaker, the 8 has a LN set. I originally just got the LN blade which improved the performance marginally, but with the addition of the LN chipbreaker, the performance was noticeably better.

I have done price comparisons between Hock and LN in the past and for value for the Aussie dollar Hock blades from PWS are the best.

Yes, I like my Hock replacement but if you study the link I posted above maybe an Academy would be better value overall.

That's how I'd jump next time anyhow.

G'day mates,

I am still on the learning curve and really appreciate the suggestions and tips. Thanks for sharing your experiences.

I guess much depends on the wood that you're working on. And in Australia, it would mainly be hardwood.

John, as you've mentioned, the vintage planes must have a beefier blade. That's the great value that comes with the vintage stuff, built like a tank.

Ern, I visited the site you've mentioned and you're right, the Academy blade is the winner. They are the most expensive of the lot too. So, they must be worth the $$$.

Pat, did the chipbreaker make the planning smoother? Based on your using the plane before and after adding the chipbreaker, what was the most significant improvement you felt.

Again, thanks for the participation. As a new woodie, your experiences are greatly appreciated.

Cheers,

GUNN

Exactly GUNN. Horses for courses.

Tweak an old Stanley for your application, put a back-bevel on your cutter when you have interlocked grain, sharpen well and often, and so you needn't spend megabucks.

All good fun.

How often do you want to sharpen blades. That's the real question. a freshly sharpened blade will work the same no matter what the steel or which brand. Paul Williams blades are brilliant and outlast Hock or original Stanleys. But they are pricey. So the choice is simple, do you mind sharpening more often and is price an issue.

Originally Posted by Socrates

How often do you want to sharpen blades. That's the real question. a freshly sharpened blade will work the same no matter what the steel or which brand. Paul Williams blades are brilliant and outlast Hock or original Stanleys. But they are pricey. So the choice is simple, do you mind sharpening more often and is price an issue.

I agree with you about the Paul Williams blades, they are fantastic.

It may be worth mentioning that you need good stones to sharpen them too. I have found the soft King stones are not much good but the Shaptons do a good job on the harder steels.

Expensive and hard blades need expensive and hard stones.

To respond to the original question, I have tuned a few planes and have always replaced the original blades. I had a cheap #4 I put a Paul Williams blade into and - wow - a different plane altogether. I've also used a LN blade and a Hock, finding each time the blades can make or break a well tuned plane. IMHO, if you spend the time on tuning a plane well, a blade upgrade will make a significant difference.

Less hmMmMm, more schhhiiiccckkk!

I am a Yank who imported one of Paul's plane irons. It surpasses even my Gramercy D2 blades in edge holding. I tend to use aftermarkets in smoothers that are used on highly figured woods. I also tend to agree that properly fitting a chipbreaker and ,better, an aftermarket CB, provides more noticeable improvement.

Take these comments with this; I have detail re-fit frog surfaces on every plane I use. This simple task can make the most difference. Lamp black and very small file( sometimes called a "points" file from the days when auto ignitions had distributor cam contact points) do the trick. Another critical adjustment is locking the frog down square to the bed. On some blade changes the frog to iron contact will have a gap but the stiffer iron/CB keeps things working.

I leave the original steel in softwood users.There they do well. NOTICE- no scientific procedure was used to back up my gut reactions- I believe that there are some thoughfully done comparisons that reach similar conclusions.mike- PPS-the exotics are harder to sharpen- Derek can confirm, however, that I am very good at getting the most from an edge- and Shapton performance is not just elitist when it comes to getting your money's worth from exotic steel blades whether planes, chisels etc.

G'day mates,

I am wondering if there's an aftermarket Chipbreaker/Back Iron suitable for use with the Academy Blades, namely for Stanley no. 4 and 5.

I am thinking the Hock Back Iron or LN's Improved Chipbreaker may work but just not sure.

Yesterday I performed my 1st sharpening using W/D. It was on a "Sweetheart" era blade for the no. 5 I am trying to rehab. The blade was neglected and it is pretty bad shape. I figure it is a good blade to practice.

Anyway, I went thru the W/D grits, 80, 180, 400, 600, 800 and finally 1200. I used the 80 for hand grinding a primary bevel. With a cheap grinding/honing guide, after about 30, minutes, I got a good primary and began taking the primary thru the grits. I started the secondary at 400. I use the "Hock" method of doing the front and back on the same grit, cleaning the blade, guide and surface after each level. I am happy to say, I got it to the 'shaving hair of your wrist" sharp.

So, I am in the market for a replacement blade. I would like to buy Ozi Made and Paul's blades are high on the list. But, I am thinking a new beefier back iron could be a good upgrade too.

Or I may get Hock's blade & iron back combo for my no. 4 and 5.

Any suggestion is highly appreciated.

Cheers

GUNN

Hi GUNN

Firstly, that Sweetheart blade is probably a goodie, and it can do just as well as the exotic blades - if sharpened well - but it just will not last as long as a blade made from more durable, abrasion-resistant steel.

Stanley made their blades from high carbon steel (HCS) and, especially the laminated version, can take a good edge. In recent years, however, formulation of A2 steel and HSS have overtaken HCS. But it can do the job .. depending on whether it is sharp.

Your blades are not sharp enough. Not if you are stopping at 1200. On sandpaper you need to go to 2500. Get this from an auto store. I think Carba-tec and Timbercon stock it as well.

Regardless of durability, Stanley planes work best on softer woods. You can use them on straight grained hardwoods as well, but forget highly figured timber. A high-priced aftermarket blade will not help here.

Regards from Perth

Derek

Originally Posted by J.E. Mike Tobey

Take these comments with this; I have detail re-fit frog surfaces on every plane I use. This simple task can make the most difference. Lamp black and very small file( sometimes called a "points" file from the days when auto ignitions had distributor cam contact points) do the trick. Another critical adjustment is locking the frog down square to the bed.

Something that is often overlooked. I'm amazed that plane makers often can't or don't machine these things properly & they aren't in a plane.

G'day mates,

Derek, I will definitely take my blades thru the higher grits though 2000 is the highest I have for now. I will source for higher grits.

I reckon the HNT Gordon's planes are more suited to the Australian hardwoods. But they are out of my price range now. Maybe I can buy his kits for the Block and Jack planes.

I do have an older Mujingfang from a friend. It is about 230mm in length, I am guessing it is a smoother. The blade's primary is at 25 degrees and secondary at about 30 degrees. Do you think it can be used on the local hardwoods? I am asking because I may be able to buy more Mujingfang planes thru my friend.

AlexS, I have Garrett Hack's Handplane book from the library and the section on tuning the plane does mention about fitting/refitting the frog. I will definitely take a closer look at that. Thanks for bringing that to my attention again.

I will save my money for now and take what I have thru the courses, better sharpening and proper fitting.

Thanks for the great advice. Much appreciated.

Cheers

GUNN